Case Name: THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES v. F. SIGNORET
Court: Supreme Court of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1875
Citations: 50 Cal. 298
Docket Number: No. 4423
Parties: THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES v. F. SIGNORET.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Reports
Volume: 50
Pages: 298–299

Head Matter:
[No. 4423.]
THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES v. F. SIGNORET.
Matters or Substance in a Complaint.—Matters of substance, which are necessary to be alleged in a complaint, cannot be left out, and the defect supplied by reference to an exhibit attached to and made a part of the complaint.
Appeal from the District Court, Seventeenth Judicial District, County of Los Angeles.
Action to enforce a lien on a lot in the city of Los Angeles for an assessment levied on the lot for the construction of a sewer. The lien was sought to be enforced under the provisions of the act to incorporate said city, passed March 11, 1850, and the amendments thereto approved April 4, 1850, and February 20, 1872. The complaint merely alleged that in pursuance of the facts set forth in a notice and claim of lien recorded in Book No. 1, of Mechanics’ Liens, pages 251, et seq., recorder’s office Los Angeles County, on the 16th day of August, 1873, which notice was annexed to the complaint, and marked exhibit “A,” and made a part of the complaint, and to which, for all particular allegations therein contained, reference was made, the plaintiff laid out and constructed a sewer over and along the lot, and that by virtue of the premises, the plaintiff acquired a lien on the lot for the assessments levied thereon. There were no allegations showing that the council had followed the steps required by the act to acquire and enforce a lien. The notice of lien, however, contained a recital of these various steps, and upon that the pleader relied. The defendant demurred to the complaint, and the court overruled the demurrer. The plaintiff had judgment, and the defendant appealed.
J. R. McConnell, for the Appellant.
A. W. Hutton, for the Respondent.

Opinion:
By the Court:
Several matters of substance are lacking in the averments found in the complaint, which are sought to be supplied only by reference to the recitals found in an-exhibit annexed to the complaint—"and to which (exhibit) for all particular allegations therein contained, reference is hereby made," etc. This is not sufficient in pleading.
Judgment reversed and cause remanded, with directions to sustain the demurrer to the complaint.