Legal Opinion

Gomez v. Scanlan

California Supreme Court

Decided May 13, 1909No. S.F. No. 4887PublishedCited by 27 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtSloss, J.

This is an action to recover damages for false imprisonment of the plaintiff Magdalena Gomez by the defendant Scanlan. Scanlan was constable of the eleventh township of the county of Contra Costa, and his codefendants were sureties on his official bond. After the commencement of the action, John H. Gomez, who, as husband of Magdalena, had joined as plaintiff, died. His wife obtained letters of administration of his estate, and, as administratrix, was substituted for the decedent. Individually, and as such administratrix, she recovered judgment for two thousand dollars. The defendants appeal…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. McFadden v. Santa Ana, Orange, & Tustin Street RailwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. McKune v. Santa Clara Valley Mill & Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Morgan v. Southern Pac. Co.California Supreme Court · 1892
  4. Tell v. GibsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
  5. Matthew v. Central Pacific RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1883

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Scott v. Times-Mirror Co.California Supreme Court · 1919
  2. Dragna v. WhiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Abbott v. CooperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Easton v. United Trade Sch. Contracting Co.California Supreme Court · 1916
  5. Moody v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1914

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

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

Powered by the Exa API