Case Name: HESTON v. MARTIN
Court: Supreme Court of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1858
Citations: 11 Cal. 41
Docket Number: 
Parties: HESTON v. MARTIN.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Reports
Volume: 11
Pages: 41–42

Head Matter:
HESTON v. MARTIN.
In a mechanic’s lien, it is not necessary to give the items of the work and materials, in the statement of the lien filed, where the contract for the construction of the building is in a sum in gross.
Appeal from the District Court of the Twelfth Judicial District, County of San Francisco.
This was an action to enforce a mechanic’s lien, for the construction of a house and materials furnished.
Plaintiff made a written contract with the defendant for the construction of a house. Defendant was to pay therefor a specified sum in instalments.
The case was tried by the Court, and judgment rendered for the defendants—the Court finding that, under the contract, there was nothing due. By a stipulation entered into, it was agreed to submit to the Court for its decision, the question, whether the amount of 12,080.75—this being the balance due under the contract—was a lien upon the premises. The Court rendered a decision establishing a lien to this amount, from which decision this appeal is taken.
Robert C. & Daniel Rogers for Appellant.
Harmon & Labatt for Respondent.

Opinion:
Baldwin, J., delivered the opinion of the Court
Field J., conccurring.
This appeal is without merit, and it is apparent that the only point seriously urged by the appellant—to wit: that an account is necessary, giving the items of work and materials in the statement of lien filed— cannot be maintained in case of a contract for a sum in gross.
Judgment affirmed, with ten per cent, damages.