Emigh-Winchell Hdw. Co. v. Pylman
Emigh-Winchell Hardware Company (A Corporation) v. Amos Pylman
- Proceeding
- appeal from a judgment
- Trial court
- Superior Court of Yolo County
- Trial judge
- W. A. Anderson
- Outcome
- other — The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- The Court. — (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
This is an action to foreclose a mechanic's lien and to bring about a sale of the premises should it be necessary to enforce the payment as claimed.
It was said in Weldon v. Superior Court, 138 Cal. 427, [71 P. 502]: "The action, so far as it sought to foreclose the lien against the premises, was unquestionably an equitable suit." In Goldtree v. City of San Diego, 8 Cal.App. 505, [97 P. 216], citing that case, it was said: "The contention that the lien is not of equitable cognizance because created by law cannot be considered. Such a distinction would destroy all equitable jurisdiction to carry out the provisions of the code. The remedy for the enforcement of the lien is clearly an equitable one."
The jurisdiction is in the supreme court (Const., sec. 4, art, VI), and the case is therefore transferred to that court. *Page 47
Cites, in this corpus
- Goldtree v. City of San Diego Civ. No. 445. · 1908-07-09
- Weldon v. Superior Court L.A. No. 1268. · 1903-01-27