Legal Opinion

Hubermann v. National Surety Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 17, 1918No. Civ. No. 2265PublishedCited by 3 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

WORKS, J., pro tem.

This is an action to recover on two bonds, given concurrently with a contract for the construction of a building for the appellant. One of the bonds was executed pursuant to the provisions of section 1183 of the Code of Civil Procedure, relating to mechanics’ liens, and the other was a common-law bond, given to secure a faithful performance of the building contract. There had been prosecuted to final judgment, before the trial of the present action, certain consolidated actions for the foreclosure of mechanics’ liens on the building agreed to be constructed under the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Robson v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  2. Paine v. San Bernardino Valley Traction Co.California Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Barker Brothers v. JoosCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1918

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Standard Oil Co. v. John P. Mills OrganizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Atherley v. MacDonald, Young & Nelson, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1955
  3. Tanaka v. Highway Farming Co.California Court of Appeal · 1926

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

Powered by the Exa API