Hooper v. Flood
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment for the plaintiffs, in the Nineteenth District Court, City and County of San Francisco. Wheeler, J. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Department No. 2, Sharpstein, J.:
This is an action for the foreclosure of five mechanics’ liens. Four of the persons claiming liens united in the action as original plaintiffs, and one of them was permitted to come in as an intervenor. Each of the original plaintiffs stated his cause of action in an independent count. To that we cannot perceive any serious objection.
The action is brought against Alexander Flood and James Irvine, and in the complaint it is alleged that Irvine is the owner of the premises affected by the liens, “ and that the defendant, Alexander Flood, was employed by said…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Wood v. WredeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873
3Cited by14 opinions
- Lavin v. BradleyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1890
- Peccole v. Luce & Goodfellow, Inc.Nevada Supreme Court · 1949
- Malter v. Falcon Mining Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1883
- Cohn v. WrightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Diamond Match Co. v. Sanitary Fruit Co.California Court of Appeal · 1925
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.