AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

CRANE COMPANY (a Corporation), Respondent, v. MARYLAND CASUALTY COMPANY (a Corporation), Appellant.

BEASLY, J., pro tem. —

The defendant, Maryland Casualty Company, appeals from a judgment in favor of plaintiff upon a statutory bond furnished pursuant to section 1183 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the defendant to the owner of the building that was being erected by Siebert Company, as contractors, and for which the plaintiff, Crane Company, furnished materials.

The sole question in the case is whether or not it was a condition precedent to the recovery by the respondents in this action against appellants upon their bond that the respondent file a claim of lien pursuant to the provisions of the mechanic's lien law. The trial court decided this question in the negative, and in accordance with this answer gave judgment for plaintiff, although plaintiff had filed no such claim. The answer given by the trial court to the question was incorrect and the judgment must, therefore, be reversed, and it is so ordered. ( Hubbard v. Jurian, 35 Cal.App. 757, [ 170 P. 1093].)

Lennon, P. J., and Kerrigan, J., concurred.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

CRANE CO. v. MARYLAND CASUALTY CO
(Apr 29, 1918)