History
  • No items yet
midpage
Barry v. Coughlin
90 Cal. 220
Cal.
1891
Check Treatment
Sharpstein, J.

— Action for the foreclosure of a mechanic’s lien. The plaintiff was employed to work on a building of defendant Coughlin’s by the defendant Grace, who had contracted with defendant Coughlin to make certain repairs on said building. The defendants Coughlin, Galdón, and Galdón answered the plaintiff’s complaint by alleging that the claim and demand of the plaintiff has been fully paid and discharged. Defendant Grace does not answer.

The only issue raised by the pleadings is that of payment, and upon that issue the parties went to trial. The court found in favor of the defendants, and entered judgment accordingly. Appellant moved for a new trial on the ground that the decision is not justified by the evidence. There was some evidence tending to prove payment, and we cannot disturb the finding of the court on that issue, although if sitting as a trial court we might have found otherwise.

Judgment and order affirmed.

McFarland, J., and De Haven, J., concurred.

Hearing in Bank denied.

Case Details

Case Name: Barry v. Coughlin
Court Name: California Supreme Court
Date Published: Jul 16, 1891
Citation: 90 Cal. 220
Docket Number: No. 13401
Court Abbreviation: Cal.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.