Adamson v. Paonessa
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. 'Benjamin E. Page, Arthur C. Hurt and Arthur F. Coe for Defendant and Appellant. Edwin. A. Meserve, Shirley E. Meserve and F. C. Austin for Defendant-Respondent Charles W. Lloyd.
1Opinion of the CourtLawlor, J.
This is an appeal from a judgment in an interpleader suit in favor of one of the defendants and claimants as against the other defendant and claimant. There is practically no conflict in the evidence and the material facts are as follows:
One Paonessa entered into a contract with the city of Colton for the doing of certain street work under the “Improvement Act of 1911.” (Stats. 1911, p. 730.) As a condition of the contract he was required by the statute to give, and did give, a surety bond for the payment of claims for materials furnished or labor performed in tire doing of the work. The…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Prairie State Bank v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Graham Paper Co. v. PembrokeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Widenmann v. WenigerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
3Cited by25 opinions
- Austin v. Hallmark Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1943
- Greco v. Oregon Mutual Fire InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
- H. S. Mann Corp. v. MoodyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
- California Bank v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1942
- First National Bank v. Pomona Tile Manufacturing Co.California Court of Appeal · 1917
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.