Ah Louis v. Harwood
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
CHIPMAN, C.
This is an action to enforce certain laborers’ liens for work done upon a tunnel for the purpose of developing water. The court made an order consolidating the two eases, and judgment passed for plaintiffs. Defendants moved for a new trial, which was denied, and they appeal from the judgment and from the order.
It appears that on May 3, 1900, defendants the Whites were the owners of the premises sought to be charged with the liens, and on that day executed an option to purchase the said land, together with certain other land, to defendant Harwood. This option was for sixty days,—to…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Malone v. Big Flat Gravel Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1888
- Clancy v. PloverCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Hines v. MillerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
- John A. Roebling Sons Co. v. Bear Valley Irrigation Co.California Supreme Court · 1893
- W. F. Whittier v. J. W. WilburCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
3Cited by10 opinions
- Pacific Sash & Door Co. v. BumillerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Toner v. WhybrewIndiana Court of Appeals · 1912
- Thirteenth Street Corp. v. A-1 Plumbing & Heating Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1982
- White v. Constitution Mining & Milling Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1936
- Bandy v. WestoverCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.