Hearne v. De Young
California Supreme Court
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County refusing to change the place of trial of an action for libel to the county of the residence of one defendant. E. S. Torrance, Judge, The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Searls, C.
This is an appeal from an order of the superior court of the county of San Diego, denying a motion by defendant De Young to change the place of trial to the city and county of his residence, viz., the city and county of San Francisco.
The action is brought in the county of San Diego, to recover from the defendants, M. H. De Young and J. F. Blunt, and each of them, the sum of one hundred thousand dollars as damages sustained by plaintiff, by reason of an alleged libel published by said defendants of and concerning plaintiff in the San Francisco Chronicle.
The complaint avers that…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Smith v. WhittierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Cook v. PendergastCalifornia Supreme Court · 1882
- Patterson & Frisbie v. ElyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
- Pearkes v. FreerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- Hawes v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Donohoe v. WoosterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Ward Manufacturing Co. v. MileyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
- Monogram Co. v. KingsleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
- Quint v. DimondCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Farnsworth v. Union Pac. Coal Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1907
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.