Spaulding

Spaulding v. Mammoth Spring Mining Co.

Good Law
1897 Cal. LEXIS 951·5 Cal. Unrep. 712·49 P. 183
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJune 17, 1897Sac. No. 186California1,096 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Haynes, J.

On December 18, 1893, J. D. Reilly, the appellant in this case, commenced an action against the Mammoth Spring Mining Company to recover the sum of $428.53 due him from said corporation for timber theretofore sold *713 and delivered to said corporation, and on the same day caused a writ of attachment to be issued in said action, which was levied upon all the property of the corporation. At and prior to the date of said attachment said corporation was indebted to B. Spaulding and Daniel Dever for labor performed upon the mining property of said corporation. Denver assigned his claim for said labor to Spaulding, and on January 2, 1894, B. Spaulding commenced an action against the corporation to recover the same, and made appellant, Reilly, a party defendant. Pending the suit, E. Spaulding died, and his administrator was substituted as plaintiff. The action of Spaulding against the corporation was brought under an act -entitled “An act to provide for the payment of the wages of mechanics and laborers employed by corporations,” approved March 31, 1891 (Stats. 1891, p. 195), and which purports to create a lien in favor of laborers under the circumstances therein stated. Reilly was made…

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.