Legal Opinion

Finn v. Diamond Laundry Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 16, 1921No. Civ. No. 3298PublishedCited by 2 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.

In an action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien plaintiff had judgment, from which defendant has appealed.

The notice of lien filed sets forth two separate and distinct contracts under and in accordance with which plaintiff, as therein stated, performed work and labor in superintending the installation of plumbing fixtures in a building which defendant, as owner, was constructing.

By the complaint each of these contracts is made the subject of a separate cause of action. In the first count thereof it alleged that defendant, through its duly authorized agent, made a contract with plaintiff to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Santa Monica Lumber & Mill Co. v. HegeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Wagner v. HansenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Reed v. NortonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Allen v. RoufsOregon Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Graf v. PetryOregon Supreme Court · 1926

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API