Legal Opinion

Remillard-Dandini Co. v. Dandini

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 3, 1941No. Civ. 11537PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

NOUBSE, P. J.-

The plaintiff sued for damages for interference with its business. Before a ruling was had on the defendants’ demurrer it was stricken from the files and they filed their answer. They thereafter made a motion for judgment on the pleadings which was granted upon the sole ground that the complaint did not state a cause of action. The appeal is taken on the judgment roll and presents the single question whether a cause of action in tort is stated where plaintiff sues for the defendants’ “intentional interference with contractual rights and relationships of plaintiff. ’ ’ Before…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Imperial Ice Co. v. RossierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. California Grape Control Board., Ltd. v. California Produce Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1935

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Bear Stearns & Co.California Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Augustine v. TruccoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  3. Elsbach v. MulliganCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  4. Guillory v. GodfreyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
  5. Freed v. Manchester Service, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1958

12 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