Walsh v. McMenomy
California Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, and from an order refusing a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtSearls, C. J.
This is an action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien in favor of a'material-man, and for labor performed. Plaintiff had judgment, from which, and from an order denying a new trial, defendants J. C. McMenomy and Mary J. McMenomy, his wife, appeal. The defendant Mary J. McMenomy owned a lot of land in the city of Los Angeles. Her husband J. C. Mc-Menomy, in 1884, made a contract with the defendant *358Brittlestone to build a house upon said lot of land. By the terms of the contract seventy-five per cent of the value of the work done was to be paid to the contractor upon the certificate of the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Bowen v. AubreyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
- Dingley v. GreeneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Renton v. ConleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
- Wiggins v. BridgeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
- Quale v. MoonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Lee v. MurphyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Lovret v. SeyfarthCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
- Roystone Co. v. DarlingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- Merrigan v. EnglishMontana Supreme Court · 1889
- Hoffman-Marks Co. v. SpiresCalifornia Supreme Court · 1908
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.