10 Cal. 522
Decided July 1, 1858
California Supreme Court · decided 1858-07-01
This was an action to recover the sum of $2256, for work and labor, and materials furnished, and to foreclose a mechanic’s lien on certain premises. The defendants plead a former suit pending between the same parties, and for the same subject-matter, but failed to show that a summons had been issued and returned in the former suit. The Court below gave judgment for the plaintiff, and decreed the foreclosure of the mechanic’s lien. Defendants appealed.
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 1901
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1858-07-01
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1Field, J., and Baldwin, J., concurring.
¶2The first and second assignments of error are not supported by the record.
¶3The third is not well taken. To support a plea in abatement *523founded on the pendency of a prior action, it is necessary to show that process was issued in such action. (See Weaver v. Conger, 10 Cal.)
¶4The fourth is not supported by the record. Upon the whole, it appears that the appeal was taken merely for delay, and the judgment is affirmed, with ten per cent, damages.