Rechtsteiner v. National Surety Co. of New York
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Charles Monroe, Judge. ■The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the Court
WOOD, J.,
pro tem.—This is an action brought by the owner of a building against the surety on the contractor’s bond. The bond was conditioned that the builder would indemnify the owner against loss or damage directly caused by reason of the failure of the builder to perform his contract. The owner completed the work after it was abandoned by the contractor, and filed the proper notice of cessation of labor. Thereafter sixteen claims of lien were filed, two of which were subsequent to the expiration of thirty days after the notice. Suits for foreclosure were brought upon all these claims, and…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Tebbets v. Fidelity and Casualty Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
- Daly v. RizzuttoWashington Supreme Court · 1910
- Sheard v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1910
3Cited by5 opinions
- Camelot Excavating Co., Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1981
- Sanders v. Am. Cas. Co. of ReadingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
- City of Hot Springs v. National Surety Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1975
- Camelot Excavating Co., Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1981
- Lister v. Great American InsuranceUtah Supreme Court · 1971