Santa Cruz Rock Pavement Co. v. Bowie
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, and from an order denying a new trial. The action was brought to foreclose the lien of a street assessment. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
Harkison J.
Assuming that, in an action to foreclose the lien of a street assessment, it is competent for the defendant to show that the work contracted for has not been done, or that the specifications for the work have been manifestly disregarded (McVerry v. Kidwell, 63 Cal. 246), such a defense must not only he alleged in the answer, hut must also be supported by evidence at the trial. If the court refuses to hear any evidence in support thereof, or disregards it in its decision, exception should he taken to its rulings, in order to have the same considered upon a motion for a new trial.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Emery v. BradfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- Cassidy v. SullivanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
- Klockenbaum v. PiersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
- McVerry v. KidwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883
3Cited by8 opinions
- Vallejo & Northern R.R. v. Reed Orchard Co.California Supreme Court · 1915
- Slemons v. PatersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
- People v. McCaddonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- Porter v. AndersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910
- Rudin v. LumanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.