Davitt v. American Bakers' Union
Citations
- 124 Cal. 99
- 56 P. 775
- 1899 Cal. LEXIS 948
Syllabus
<p>Boycotting—Injunction — Pleading—Uncertainty—Special Demurrer.—A complaint in an action for damages and for a perpetual injunction to prevent the boycotting of the plaintiffs’ business by the defendants, which deals in generalities throughout, and does not state any specific overt acts done in pursuance of the conspiracy charged, nor specify what particular threats were made, or what amount or kind of force was used, or what kind or character of menace was exercised, or how the business was to he boycotted, nor set out the substance of false and malicious publications and circulars alleged to have been pub- . . lished and circulated by the defendants, in front of plaintiff’s place of business, to prevent persons from dealing with them, is insufficient upon special demurrer for uncertainty, if not upon general demurrer.</p> <p>Id.—Pleading in Equity.—A pleading which asks for the interposition of equitable relief must state the specific facts upon which the relief is sought; and inferences, generalities, presumptions, and conclusions have no place in such a pleading.</p> <p>Id.—Conspiracy not Actionable.—A conspiracy, however atrocious its purpose, is not the subject of a civil action.</p> <p>Id.—Contents of Publications.—The contents of the false and malicious publications and circulars alleged to have been published and distributed by defendants to injure plaintiff’s business, or at least the substance of them, must be set out in the complaint, that it may appear whether or not they were upon their face • ' injurious.</p>
Judges: Garoutte
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
10 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Chicago Title Insurance v. Great Western Financial Corp.California Supreme Court· 1968-08-28· cited 153×
- McKay v. Retail Automobile Salesmen's Local Union No. 1067California Supreme Court· 1940-10-14· cited 115×
- Magill Bros. v. Building Service Employees' International UnionCalifornia Supreme Court· 1942-07-02· cited 46×
- E. H. Renzel Co. v. Ware-Housemen's Union I. L. A. 38-44California Supreme Court· 1940-10-14· cited 34×
- Bank of America National Trust & Saving Ass'n v. WilliamsCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1948-12-06· cited 26×
- Wallace v. KerrCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1940-12-30· cited 7×
- Bartley v. California Association of RealtorsCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1980-12-16· cited 6×
- Abbot Kinney Co. v. HarrahCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1948-04-06· cited 5×
- City of Leavenworth v. Green River Asphalt Co.Supreme Court of Kansas· 1917-06-09· cited 1×
- City of Taft v. West Kern County Water DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1968-05-17
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.