Fladung

Fladung v. Dawson

Good Law
1896 Cal. LEXIS 1111·5 Cal. Unrep. 286·43 P. 1107
Supreme Court of CaliforniaFebruary 25, 1896S. F. No. 289California703 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Harrison, J.

The .plaintiff brought this action to recover from the defendant Adams for certain labor and *287 materials furnished by him, and to have the same declared a lien upon a certain building belonging to the defendant Dawson. The plaintiff, as a subcontractor, had furnished the materials and labor to Adams, who had contracted with Dawson for the construction of the building, and the materials and labor were furnished and used in such construction. At the trial it was shown that the building had been completed more than thirty days prior to the plaintiff’s filing of his claim of lien, and he was denied a lien against the building, and judgment was rendered in favor of Dawson. The plaintiff, however, recovered judgment against Adams for the sum of $1,015, from which, and an order denying a new trial, Adams has appealed.

The finding of the court that no special contract was made and entered into between the plaintiff and the appellant as to the amount that the appellant should pay plaintiff for his work and material is not only not sustained by the evidence, but is in direct opposition to all the evidence on the subject. The real issue which was contested at the trial was the price that…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.