Sparling v. Housman
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtMussell, J.
Action on building contract. Plaintiff and defendants on May 13, 1946, entered into a written agreement whereby the plaintiff agreed to construct for the defendants a dwelling house and garage on real property situated in the city of Bakersfield. The contract provided that the total cost of construction would be $7,800 and that the plaintiff, a building contractor, would be paid on the following basis: First payment when the form was up; second when the plaster was finished; third when the notice of completion was filed; and fourth payment 30 days after the filing of such notice. Defendants…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Estate of Bristol v. YoungCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Dillard v. McKnightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- Bekins Van Lines, Inc. v. JohnsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Noble v. Kertz & Sons Feed & Fuel Co.California Court of Appeal · 1945
- Otey v. Carmel Sanitary DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Carter v. QuickSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1978
- Sanfran Co. v. Rees Blow Pipe Manufacturing Co.California Court of Appeal · 1959
- Bonetti v. Double Play TavernCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
- Bonetti v. Double Play TavernCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954