Legal Opinion

Yancy v. Morton

California Supreme Court

Decided May 24, 1892No. 14604PublishedCited by 33 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County, and from an order denying a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtGaroutte, J.

Action by material-men to foreclose a lien for material furnished in the erection of a building. This appeal is by defendant from the judgment and order denying his motion for a new trial. Poore and Anton, as original contractors, agreed to erect a building for defendant for the sum of twenty-seven hundred dollars. Prior to the completion of the contract, they abandoned the work, and plaintiff now brings this action against the owner of the building for the value of *560the material furnished, claiming that the contract was absolutely void, because, — 1. Twenty-five per cent of the contract price…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Fresno Canal & Irrigation Co. v. WarnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  2. Russ Lumber & Mill Co. v. GarrettsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  3. San Diego Lumber Co. v. WooldredgeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Worden v. HammondCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
  5. Holland v. WilsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888

3Cited by33 opinions

  1. Greig v. RiordanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Martin v. BeckerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  3. C.A. MacOmber v. L. M. BigelowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  4. Burnett v. GlasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
  5. Camp v. LandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898

28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API