Flandreau v. White
California Supreme Court
Appeal from the Seventeenth District. Plaintiffs obtained two judgments against one Downey upon complaints filed on the thirteenth of September, 1858, in actions to enforce liens for lumber furnished for and used in the construction of two buildings—a stable and another building. The summons in each action was dated September 13th, 1858, and placed in the Sheriff’s»hands on the fifteenth of that month—meanwhile remaining in the Clerk’s office.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Seventeenth District. Plaintiffs obtained two judgments against one Downey upon complaints filed on the thirteenth of September, 1858, in actions to enforce liens for lumber furnished for and used in the construction of two buildings—a stable and another building. The summons in each action was dated September 13th, 1858, and placed in the Sheriff’s»hands on the fifteenth of that month—meanwhile remaining in the Clerk’s office. There was no contract for credit on the lumber for the stable, which was furnished from March 28th to September 1st, 1857; the notice of lien being…
1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, J.
Field, C. J. and Cope, J. concurring.
Judgment affirmed. The suit was not brought within six months from the expiration of the credit. The mere filing of a complaint is not sufficient to constitute a suit brought within the meaning of the Mechanics’ Lien Law. The filing of the complaint and the issuing of the summons are required by the General Practice Act, and the provision in the General Limitation Act, (Wood’s Dig. 45) that the filing of the complaint shall* be deemed a commencement of the suit, applies to that act only, and not to the Mechanics’ Lien Law.
2Cited by5 opinions
- Burns v. White Swan Mining Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1899
- Flandreau v. DowneyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
- Pacific Coast Railway Co. v. PorterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Sharp v. MaguireCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862
- Van Winkle v. GrimmCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863