Case ID: cal-app_31/html/0046-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "THE COURT.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[Civ. No. 1582.
    Third Appellate District.
    July 6, 1916.]
    EMIGH-WINCHELL HARDWARE COMPANY (a Corporation) , Appellant, v. AMOS PYLMAN et al., Respondents.
    Mechanics’ Mens — Equitable Jurisdiction — Appeal.—A mechanic’s lien is of equitable cognizance, although created by law; and an appeal in an action to foreclose the same lies to t'he supreme court.
    APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Yolo County. W. A. Anderson, Judge.
    The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
    Devlin & Devlin, for Appellant.
    White, Miller, Needham & Harber, for Respondents.
   THE COURT.

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 Pac. 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 Pac. 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.