Blackman v. Marsicano
61 Cal. 638, 1882 Cal. LEXIS 681
Opinion
The claim of lien in this case, in stating the terms, time given, and conditions of the contract, used the words, “ cash upon demand, in gold coin of the United States.” This was a substantial compliance with the requirement of the statute. The case of Hooper v. Flood (54 Cal. 221) presented a statement quite different in effect from that here presented.
Judgment and order reversed, and cause remanded for a new trial.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Blackman v. Marsicano, 61 Cal. 638, 1882 Cal. LEXIS 681 (Cal. 1882).
61 Cal. 638 (Blackman v. Marsicano) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Castagnetto v. Coppertown Mining & Smelting Co.
80 P. 74 (California Supreme Court, 1905)
Kelley v. Plover
36 P. 1020 (California Supreme Court, 1894)
Tredinnick v. Red Cloud Consolidated Mining Co.
13 P. 152 (California Supreme Court, 1887)