Kelly

Kelly v. Lemberger

Good Law
1896 Cal. LEXIS 1121·5 Cal. Unrep. 433·46 P. 8
Supreme Court of CaliforniaSeptember 15, 1896S. F. No. 160California796 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Four actions having been brought against the defendants to foreclose mechanics’ liens upon certain land in Berkeley, they were consolidated and tried together under the above title. One of these actions was brought by H. W. Taylor, and judgment was rendered in his favor, giving him a personal judgment against Lemberger, and making the same a lien upon the land. Certain of the defendants moved for a new trial as against the claim of Taylor, and the present appeal is taken from the judgment and from the order denying their motion for a new trial.

The question presented by the appellants is the sufficiency of the claim of lien filed by Taylor, and the error relied upon by them in their motion for a new trial was the admission in evidence of this claim of lien and the insufficiency of the evidence to sustain certain findings. • Por the purpose of stating “the name of the owner or reputed owner, if known,” of the land upon which the improvements were made, the claim of lien offered in evidence was as follows: “That Charles A. Bailey and Prank Lemberger are the names of the owners, and they are the reputed owners, of said premises, and caused said buildings and structures to be erected…

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.