Legal Opinion
Grinnell Fire Protection System Co. v. American Savings & Loan Ass'n
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 15, 1986No. A031247PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
SCOTT, J.
In this appeal we decide that a materialman must name all parties intended to be bound by an action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien within the time specified in Civil Code section 3144. If the materialman does not have actual knowledge of a junior lienor’s interest in the property, the materialman can, however, satisfy the requirements of section 3144 by naming the junior lienor as a Doe defendant.
Grinnell Fire Protection Systems Company, Inc. (Grinnell), acting as a general contractor, performed work on a project called Seaport Village North (Seaport) in Redwood City. Grinnell…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Randone v. Appellate DepartmentCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
- Connolly Development, Inc. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Munoz v. PurdyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
- Nolte v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
- Irving v. CarpentierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Woo v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- Westfour Corp. v. California First BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
- Scottsdale Memorial Health Systems, Inc. v. ClarkArizona Supreme Court · 1988
- People v. MendivalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
- Sobeck & Associates, Inc. v. B & R Investments No. 24California Court of Appeal · 1989
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.