Legal Opinion

Ginsberg v. Faraone

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 27, 1932No. Docket No. 7784PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LANDIS, J., pro tem.

The action as originally commenced on May 25, 1926, was entitled “Ginsberg Tile Company, a copartnership, against Salvatore Faraone and Jennie Faraone, his wife”, alleging that certain work had been done by the plaintiff upon the improved property of the defendants under an agreement between them whereby •plaintiff was to be paid $593.75 for its work, which amount was unpaid, and that a claim of lien had been filed for record on February 24, 1926, with a prayer for judgment for said sum of $593.75, and for a foreclosure of the lien. There was no allegation in the complaint…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Cox v. McLaughlinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1881
  2. Frost v. WitterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  3. Doolittle v. McConnellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
  4. Castagnino v. BallettaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  5. Walsh v. MckeenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Jones v. WiltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Barr v. CarrollCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  3. Saari v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  4. Allen v. ClarkDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1938
  5. Boyles v. FreemanAppellate Court of Illinois · 1974

3 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