Legal Opinion

Mannix v. Tryon

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 3, 1906No. Civ. No. 137PublishedCited by 1 opinion

MOTION to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County. J. W. Hughes, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtMcLAUGHLIN, J.

This is a motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment foreclosing the lien of a subcontractor. The appeal is prosecuted by the owner of the premises, and respondent bases the pending motion on the ground that no notice of appeal was served upon the original contractor, who was a party defendant. Appellant, resisting the motion, contends that such contractor is not an adverse party, because reversal will aid instead of injuring' him. This contention rests on the proposition that as the judgment against the original contractor is for the sum of $187 it must fall if the lien is declared invalid.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Miller v. CarlisleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  2. Hibernia Savings & Loan Society v. BehnkeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Keyes v. HurlbertCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API