Legal Opinion

Jones v. Pollock

California Supreme Court

Decided March 14, 1950No. L. A. 21225PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.

J. Elbert Jones, a building contractor, sued to foreclose a mechanic’s lien and to recover a balance claimed due under a written contract to construct a residence for James and Jane Pollock. The court determined that recovery must be limited to “the estimated cost” stated in the contract, plus extras, rather than the amount of the cost of construction. The appeal of Jones from the judgment presents as a question of law the nature and effect of the agreement made by the parties.

By the “Contract For Building,” Jones agreed “. . . for the consideration hereinafter named to furnish the necessary…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Trubowitch v. Riverbank Canning Co.California Supreme Court · 1947
  2. Harding v. RobinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
  3. Miranda v. MirandaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Doers v. Golden Gate Bridge, Higway & Transportation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Charles J. Frank, Inc. v. Associated Jewish Charities of Baltimore, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1982
  3. Case v. Kadota Fig Ass'n of ProducersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Local 659, I.A.T.S.E. v. Color Corp. of AmericaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  5. Bertero v. Superior Court of Los Angeles CountyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963

15 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