Legal Opinion
Milano v. Bulleri
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 25, 1932No. Docket No. 8414PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSpence, J.
Plaintiff commenced this action to foreclose a materialman’s lien for materials furnished by plaintiff to the defendant subcontractor, A. Fraumeni. Said defendant and the defendant owners, J. Bulleri and Christine Bulleri, defaulted and the action was dismissed as to the defendant T. Sharman, the contractor. Judgment of default was entered after a hearing, which judgment decreed foreclosure of the lien in the sum of $302.60. The defendant owners appeal.
Appellants have not complied with rule VIII of the Rules of the Supreme Court and District Courts of Appeal. Their brief fails to “present…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Corcoran v. WardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
- Richmond Terminal Corp. v. Parr Terminal Co.California Court of Appeal · 1931
- Hawkins v. DoolittleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
- Sun Lumber Co. v. BradfieldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Barnes v. CockeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Cunnyngham v. Mason-Mcduffie Co., Inc.California Supreme Court · 1933
- Frank Graves Sash, Door & Mill Co. v. KarolyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Herlihy v. WardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
- Currier v. Oakland AssociationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
- Milano v. RattoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.