Legal Opinion

Krenwinkel v. Henne.

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 8, 1919No. Civ. No. 2931PublishedCited by 2 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.

These two actions, brought for the foreclosure of mechanics’ liens against defendants and appellants, were consolidated in the superior court and tried as one. The liens claimed were for labor done and materials furnished in making certain alterations and improvements in a storeroom in the Henne Building, occupied by Naumann & Sehill, Inc., as tenants of the defendants and appellants, who were the owners.

Each lien claimant was an original contractor, and all the work done and materials furnished was at the instance of said tenants, and without the actual knowledge of appellants. The evidence…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Jarvis v. FreyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. M. Arthur Gensler, Jr., & Associates, Inc. v. Larry Barrett, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1972
  2. Halspar, Inc. v. La BartheCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API