From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Whittier v. Hollister

Supreme Court of California
Nov 3, 1883
64 Cal. 283 (Cal. 1883)


         APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the county of Alameda, and from an order refusing a new trial.


         Charles J. Swift, for Appellant.

         H. A. Leake, for Respondent.


         PER CURIAM.

         The facts appear in the opinion of the court.

         This is an action to enforce a lien for materials furnished to a sub-contractor, which were used in the construction of a building on the premises of the defendant Hollister. The building was erected in pursuance of a contract. There is no allegation in the complaint that any money was due or to become due from the owner to the contractor. The defendant Hollister demurred to the complaint.

         The question involved in this appeal was disposed of in Latson v. Nelson, 11 P. C.L.J. 589.

         The judgment, so far as it relates to the defendant Hollister, and so far as it concerns the real estate mentioned therein, and directs a sale thereof, and the order denying her motion for a new trial, are reversed, and the cause is remanded with instruction to sustain the demurrer of the defendant Hollister. ( Renton v. Conley, 49 Cal. 185; Wells v. Cahn, 51 Cal. 423.)

Summaries of

Whittier v. Hollister

Supreme Court of California
Nov 3, 1883
64 Cal. 283 (Cal. 1883)
Case details for

Whittier v. Hollister

Case Details


Court:Supreme Court of California

Date published: Nov 3, 1883


64 Cal. 283 (Cal. 1883)
30 P. 846

Citing Cases

Nason v. John

( Sidlinger v. Kerkow, 82 Cal. 44, 22 P. 932; Dennison v. Burrell, 119 Cal. 180, 51 P. 1; Santa Monica L. and…

Wilson v. Barnard

         The complaint should have shown that something was due to the original contractor at the time of…