Ball

Ball v. Steadfast-BLK

Good Law
126 Cal. Rptr. 3d 743·196 Cal. App. 4th 694·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 736
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 14, 2011No. C064357California3,378 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Blease, J.

*697 Opinion

What’s in a name? Business and Professions Code section 7031, subdivision (a) 1 “bars all actions, however they are characterized, which effectively seek ‘compensation’ for illegal unlicensed contract work.” (Hydrotech Systems, Ltd. v. Oasis Waterpark (1991) 52 Cal.3d 988, 997 [ 277 Cal.Rptr. 517 , 803 P.2d 370 ] (Hydrotech).) In this appeal we decide whether subdivision (a) bars plaintiff David E. Ball, who was licensed by the Contractors State License Board (CSLB) by the “License Type” “Sole Owner” under the fictitious business name “Clark Heating and Air Conditioning,” from pursuing an action to collect compensation for work performed under two contracts entered into under the transposed name “Clark Air Conditioning & Heating.”

The trial court sustained defendant Steadfast-BLK’s (Steadfast) demurrer to the fourth cause of action of the complaint for foreclosure of a mechanic’s hen without leave to amend. It found that Ball, a licensed contractor, “was never licensed as a contractor to do business in the name of Clark Air Conditioning & Heating,” and thus was precluded as a matter of law under section 7031, subdivision (a) from pursuing his action to foreclose on…

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.