Legal Opinion

Miller v. Fano

California Supreme Court

Decided September 6, 1901No. L.A. No. 817PublishedCited by 42 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

This action was brought to recover damages for false imprisonment. The court filed findings, and ordered judgment for plaintiff for the sum of fifteen hundred dollars. The defendants appeal from the judgment and from an order denying their motion for a new trial. It is claimed — and we think correctly—that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the findings, in so far as they find that defendant Fano arrested or imprisoned the plaintiff. There is no evidence.to show that defendant Fano advised or participated in the arrest or imprisonment of plaintiff.

False imprisonment is the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Joske v. IrvineTexas Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Veneman v. JonesIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
  3. Fenelon v. ButtsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
  4. Murphy v. WaltersMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
  5. Linnen v. BanfieldMichigan Supreme Court · 1897

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. RodriguezTexas Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Hagberg v. California Federal Bank FSBCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  3. Pool v. City of OaklandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Turner v. MellonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  5. Hughes v. OrebCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951

37 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