Case Name: EMIGH-WINCHELL HARDWARE COMPANY (a Corporation) , Appellant, v. AMOS PYLMAN et al., Respondents
Court: District Court of Appeal of the State of California
Jurisdiction: California
Decision Date: 1916-07-06
Citations: 31 Cal. App. 46
Docket Number: Civ. No. 1582
Parties: EMIGH-WINCHELL HARDWARE COMPANY (a Corporation) , Appellant, v. AMOS PYLMAN et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: California Appellate Reports
Volume: 31
Pages: 46–46

Head Matter:
[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.

Opinion:
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.