Legal Opinion
Lucas v. Rea
California Court of Appeal
Decided May 25, 1909No. Civ. No. 568PublishedCited by 6 opinions
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Mendocino County, and from an order denying a new trial. J. Q. White, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
A rehearing of this cause was granted principally to give further consideration to the question of' variance between the evidence and the notice of lien as to the-nature of the contract involved.
A portion of the former opinion we adopt as follows:
“The judgment in favor of plaintiff established and decreed the foreclosure of a lien for materials used in the construction of a residence belonging to defendant Rea and which was mortgaged to the said Bank of Ukiah.
“1. The complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The eases cited to the contrary by appellants are not in…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- McClain v. HuttonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Santa Monica Lumber & Mill Co. v. HegeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Malone v. Big Flat Gravel Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1888
- Yancy v. MortonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Wilson v. NugentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Harbridge v. Six Points Lumber Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1915
- Blanck v. Commonwealth Amusement Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1912
- Holtzman v. BennettNevada Supreme Court · 1924
- General Electric Co. v. Central Surety & InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
- Acme Lumber Co. v. WesslingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1912
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.