Legal Opinion

Conrad v. Foerst

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 21, 1921No. Civ. No. 3930PublishedCited by 2 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtKerrigan, J.

Action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. Plaintiff contracted with defendant to furnish all the work on a two-story and basement frame building with certain exceptions for the sum of $4,644, payable at specified times as the work progressed. Plaintiff entered upon the performance of the contract, and thereafter, so it is alleged, completed all the conditions on his part to be performed. Notice of completion of work was filed, and thereafter the architect delivered to plaintiff a certificate that the last payment mentioned in the contract was due. This payment amounted to the sum of $1,164.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Connell v. HigginsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  2. Bianchi v. HughesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Herdal v. SheehyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Schindler v. GreenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Patrick J. Ruane, Inc. v. ParkerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  2. Shumway v. WoolwineCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927

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

Powered by the Exa API