Haynie

S & Q Construction Co. v. Haynie

Good Law
1963 Cal. App. LEXIS 2955·211 Cal. App. 2d 649·27 Cal. Rptr. 589
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 9, 1963Civ. No. 10618California512 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Schottky, J.

This is an application by S & Q Construction Company and Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company for a writ of prohibition or supersedeas to prevent enforcement of a money judgment in favor of M. D. Haynie.

S & Q was the contractor on a public construction project for the City of Stockton. Hartford was its surety on a bond furnished in accordance with the provisions of section 4200 et seq. of the Government Code. Haynie was a subcontractor on the project.

Haynie sued S & Q and Hartford to recover the balance allegedly due for work performed. In a separate action S & Q sought damages from Haynie for negligence in connection with a part of the contract not sublet to Haynie. The cases were consolidated for trial and recovery was in favor of Haynie in his action against S & Q and Plartford and also in S & Q’s action against Haynie.

Thereafter S & Q alone appealed from the judgment entered in each action. Hartford did not appeal from the judgment entered against it.

The petition filed in this court does not disclose that S & Q has complied with the provisions of section 942 of the Code of Civil Procedure requiring an undertaking to stay execution of a money judgment. Under such…

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.