Willden

San Joaquin Blocklite, Inc. v. Willden

Good Law
184 Cal. App. 3d 203
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 8, 1986No. F004221; No. F004346California1,784 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Best, J.

These separate appeals were consolidated by order of this court. Both appeals arise from an action by plaintiff, San Joaquin Blocklite, Inc. (Blocklite) against defendants Willden Construction Company (Willden) and Canadian Indemnity Company (Canadian), Michael T. Miller and the State of California. Miller and the State of California are not parties to these appeals. Blocklite’s second amended complaint alleged pertinent causes of action as follows: (I) breach of contract, (II) enforcement of stop notice, (III) account stated, (IV) enforcement of bond, (V) quantum meruit, (VI) money had and received, and (VII) open book account. Causes of action I, III, V, VI and VII were against Willden and Michael T. Miller on the theory they were coventurers. Following the filing of motions by the parties, the trial court entered its order for partial summary judgment, holding that Blocklite had substantially complied with the notice requirements of Civil Code 1 sections 3098 and 3091 with regard to causes of action II and IV. The trial court also entered its order for summary adjudication of issues dismissing causes of action I, III, V, VI and VII.

A court trial was subsequently held…

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.