Legal Opinion

Blair Excavators, Inc. v. Paschen Contractors, Inc.

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 6, 1992No. A052744PublishedCited by 3 opinions

[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

PETERSON, J. *

This appeal follows a trial to the court on public project bond claims concerning unpaid construction bills, after a subcontractor’s 90-day preliminary bond notice and a 20-day preliminary stop notice under Civil Code 1 sections 3091 and 3098. In the published portion of this opinion, we will hold, in affirming the judgment, that the statutory requirement of “substantial accuracy” in the statement of the amount claimed in a bond notice under section 3091 was designed to avoid prejudice to the party claimed against and that, in the absence of any such prejudice, a…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Hutnick v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.California Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Connolly Development, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Powers Regulator Co. v. Seaboard Surety Co. of New YorkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
  4. Lewis & Queen v. S. Edmondson & SonsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
  5. Truestone, Inc. v. Simi West Industrial Park IICalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. MCM Constr., Inc. v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  2. Granite Constr. Co. v. Am. Motorists Ins. Co.California Court of Appeal · 1994
  3. Rental Equipment, Inc. v. McDaniel Builders, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API