Forderer Cornice Works v. Chatham

California Court of Appeal

Forderer Cornice Works v. Chatham

54 Cal. App. 796

California Court of Appeal·Decided October 14, 1921·No. Civ. No. 3958·Published

Opinion

STURTEVANT, J.

This is an appeal by the sureties on a contractor’s bond from a judgment in favor of a material-man. The ease is parallel in all of its' facts with the case entitled W. P. Fuller & Co. v. Chatham et al., 53 Cal. App. 800 [200 Pac. 293]. A petition to have that case heard and determined by the supreme court was by that court denied September 15, 1921.

Since this case was filed, the Puller ease was heard and determined on appeal. Counsel for appellants have courteously called to our attention the above facts.'

On the authority of the Puller case the judgment is affirmed.

Nourse, J., and Langdon, P. J., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

STURTEVANT, J.

This is an appeal by the sureties on a contractor’s bond from a judgment in favor of a material-man. The ease is parallel in all of its' facts with the case entitled W. P. Fuller & Co. v. Chatham et al., 53 Cal. App. 800 [200 Pac. 293]. A petition to have that case heard and determined by the supreme court was by that court denied September 15, 1921.

Since this case was filed, the Puller ease was heard and determined on appeal. Counsel for appellants have courteously called to our attention the above facts.'

On the authority of the Puller case the judgment is affirmed.

Nourse, J., and Langdon, P. J., concurred.

Forderer Cornice Works v. Chatham, 54 Cal. App. 796 (Cal. Ct. App. 1921).

Pincite

54 Cal. App. 796 (Forderer Cornice Works v. Chatham) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related