Doggett v. Bellows

California Supreme Court March 24, 1885

Doggett v. Bellows, 2 Cal. Unrep. 454 (Cal. 1885)

6 P. 421

Opinion of the Court

By the COURT.

Action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. There is no averment in the complaint that any sum was due from the Mendocino Flume & Mining Company, the owner, to Bellows the contractor; therefore the demurrer of the company to the complaint should have been sustained: Latson v. Nelson, 11 Pac. C. L. J. 589; Whittier v. Hollister, 64 Cal. 283, 30 Pac. 846.

The judgment, so far as it concerns the Mendocino Flume & Mining Company, is reversed, and the cause is remanded with directions to sustain the demurrer above referred to.

Reference

Full Case Name: DOGGETT v. BELLOWS and Others
Status: Published
Syllabus: Mechanic’s Lien.—In an Action for the Foreclosure of a Mechanic’s Lien, the complaint should aver the amount due under the contract to the contractor from the owner of the building on which the work was done.