Robison v. Mitchel
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Gray, Baker, Bowen, Allen, Van Dyke & Jutten; for Appellant.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
This action was by a materialman to foreclose his lien upon the property of defendant Fawkes for material furnished in the construction of a frame dwelling. Judgment passed for plaintiff, awarding him a lien, and from that judgment and from the order denying his motion for a new trial the defendant Fawkes appeals.
The contractors for the construction of. the building were copartners doing business under the firm name of J. Burris Mitchel & Company. Their contract with appellant was in writing and valid. It contained the usual stipulation for partial payments, and provided that if at any time…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Willamette Steam Mills Lumbering & Manufacturing Co. v. Los Angeles College Co.California Supreme Court · 1892
- Kerckhoff-Cuzner Mill & Lumber Co. v. OlmsteadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Johnson v. La GraveCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Marble Lime Co. v. Lordsburg Hotel Co.California Supreme Court · 1892
- Baker v. Lake Land Canal & Irrigation Co.California Court of Appeal · 1908
3Cited by15 opinions
- W. F. Hayward Co. v. TransAmerica InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1993
- Sunset Lumber Co. v. BachelderCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
- Olson-Mahoney Lumber Co. v. Dunne Investment Co.California Court of Appeal · 1916
- C. Ganahl Lumber Co. v. ThompsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Boise-Payette Lumber Co. v. LongwedelSupreme Court of Colorado · 1930
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.