Legal Opinion
McDowell v. Perry
California Court of Appeal
Decided October 17, 1935No. Civ. 1917PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJennings, J.
The plaintiff instituted this action for the purpose of securing a personal judgment against the defendants Perry and France, and to foreclose a mechanic’s lien for labor performed and materials furnished in connection with the drilling of a well upon land owned by Perry which he had contracted to sell to France prior to the time plaintiff commenced drilling operations. Trial of the action resulted in the entry of a judgment against defendant France, who defaulted in appearance, and in favor of Perry. From the judgment thus rendered plaintiff appeals.
The facts pertinent to this appeal may be…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- English v. Olympic Auditorium, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1933
- Humboldt Lumber Mill Co. v. CrispCalifornia Supreme Court · 1905
- Western Well Works, Inc. v. California Farms Co.California Court of Appeal · 1923
- McGreary v. OsborneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- S. H. Harmon Lumber Co. v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Barr Lumber Co. v. ShafferCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
- Los Banos Gravel Co. v. FreemanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- Fagerlie v. MARKHAM CONTRACTING CO., INC.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 2011
- AMERICAN TRANSIT MIX CO., INC. v. WeberCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
- Scales v. Federal Escrow Service, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1961