Holmes v. Richet
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment in the Third District Court, City and County of San Francisco. McKee, J.
1Opinion of the Court
Morrison, C. J.:
On the 20th day of March, 1876, the plaintiffs filed a complaint in the Third District Court against the defendants to enforce a claim under the mechanics’ lien law. The defendant Eichet was sued as the owner of the lot described in the complaint, and the building erected thereon; and the defendant Pharo was sued as original contractor. The suit was brought to enforce a lien for certain materials alleged to have been furnished by the plaintiffs, and the allegation of the complaint is, “ that the plaintiffs sold and delivered to defendants certain materials, consisting of lime,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- United States v. RobesonSupreme Court of the United States · 1835
- President of Delaware & Hudson Canal Co. v. Pennsylvania Coal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Herrick v. Estate of BelknapSupreme Court of Vermont · 1854
- Hudson v. McCartneyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1873
- Bottomly v. RectorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1852
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by63 opinions
- Halbert's Lumber, Inc. v. Lucky Stores, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1992
- Scottish Union & National Insurance v. ClancyTexas Supreme Court · 1888
- McDougald v. HuletCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- DIAL 800 v. FesbinderCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- Prader v. National Masonic Accident Ass'nSupreme Court of Iowa · 1895
58 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.