Penrose v. Calkins
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Nevada County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The action was brought to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. The further facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtWorks, J.
The only question presented in this case is as to the sufficiency of the description of the real estate in the notice of mechanic’s lien sought to be foreclosed.
The court below held the notice to be sufficient, and rendered judgment in favor of plaintiff.
The only reference to any real estate in the notice is as follows: “That certain lot and parcel of land situated in said county of Nevada, state of California, and sought to be charged with this lien, and described as follows, to wit.”
It would seem that it was the intention of the scriv*397ener who drew the notice to follow this general reference…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Bishop v. Hayward Lumber & Investment Co.California Court of Appeal · 1937
- Hayward Lumber & Investment Co. v. Pride of Mojave Mining Co.California Court of Appeal · 1941
- Palomar Grading v. Wells FargoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014