TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Lingard v. Beta Theta Pi Hall Ass'n

LINGARD v. BETA THETA PI HALL ASSOCIATION

Lingard v. Beta Theta Pi Hall Ass'n, 56 P. 58 (Cal. 1899)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
California Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 2, 1899
Docket
No. S. F. No. 832
Citations
56 P. 586 Cal. Unrep. 226
Syllabus
Mechanics’ Liens.—In an Action to Foreclose a Mechanic’s Lien, the complaint alleged the date of the completion of the building, and that the lien was filed on April 6, 1894, within thirty days thereafter. The answer denied "that within thirty days from and after the completion of said building, to wit, upon the sixth day of April, 1894, or at any other time, or at all,” plaintiffs filed their claim of lien, containing a statement of their demand. Held, that the answer was but a denial of the time of filing the notice of lien, and of its sufficiency, and admitted the allegation of the time when the building was completed.
Summary
APPEAL from Superior Court, Alameda County. Action by one Lingard and others against the Beta Theta Pi Hall Association and others to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. From a judgment in favor of plaintiffs, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

PER CURIAM.

Action for the foreclosure of a mechanic’s lien. The only point urged in support of the appeal is *227 that the notice of a claim of lien was not filed in the recorder’s office within thirty days after the completion of the building. It is alleged in the complaint that the building was completed on the 13th of March, 1894, and this allegation is not denied. It is also alleged that within thirty days of the completion of said building, to wit, on the sixth day of April, 1894, the plaintiffs filed for record their claim of lien, setting forth its contents. In their answer the defendants “deny that within thirty days from and after the completion of said building, to wit, upon the sixth day of April, 1894, or at any other time, or at all, plaintiffs did file for record their or any claim of lien, containing a statement of their demand,” etc. This was but a denial of the time of filing the notice of lien, and of the sufficiency of its contents to create a lien, and cannot be construed as a denial of the allegation in the complaint of the time when the building was completed. This allegation must therefore be accepted as an admission upon the record of the date when the building was completed, and, as the court would not have been authorized to make a finding contrary to this admission, it is unnecessary to determine whether the evidence before it was sufficient to sustain its finding. The court finds that the notice of lien was filed on the sixth day of April, 1894, and the correctness of this finding is not disputed. The judgment and order are affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list