Introducing Exa PlacesLearn more
Legal Opinion

Tate v. Canonica

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 17, 1960No. Civ. 18690PublishedCited by 101 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDuniway, J.

Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment against them entered after an order sustaining a demurrer to their complaint without leave to amend.

The Question Presented

Can a cause of action be predicated upon either the intentional or the negligent infliction of mental distress, which culminates in the suicide of the victim?

The Complaint

Plaintiffs are respectively the widow and children of Justin S. Tate, deceased. The first count alleges that defendants “intentionally made threats, statements and accusations against said deceased for the purpose of harassing, embarrassing, and humiliating him in the…

2Cases cited45 opinions

  1. People v. WellsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  2. People v. DaughertyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  3. People v. GorshenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
  4. Seeger v. OdellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  5. Scheffer v. Railroad Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1882

40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by101 opinions

  1. Corales v. BennettCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
  2. Nally v. Grace Community ChurchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Ochoa v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  4. Kimberlin v. DeLongIndiana Supreme Court · 1994
  5. Institute of Cetacean Research v. Sea Shepherd Conservation SocietyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014

96 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API