Legal Opinion

Conlin v. Seamen

California Supreme Court

Decided July 1, 1863PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal from the Fourth Judicial District. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtCrocker, J.

This is an action brought by the assignee of a street contractor against a property holder to enforce a lien and payment for work done in grading Lombard Street, between Stockton and Mason streets, in the City of San Francisco. The defendent demurred to the complaint on the ground, among others, that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The Court below overruled the demurrer, and no answer being filed, rendered a judgment for the plaintiff, from which the defendant appeals.

The first objection to the complaint is, that the work was not done within the one hundred…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Emery v. BradfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
  2. Nolan v. ReeseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
  3. Smith v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
  4. Second Nat. Bank of Titusville v. CaldwellDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1882
  5. Kingsley v. City of BrooklynNew York City Court · 1878

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

Powered by the Exa API