Legal Opinion

Dowdell v. Carpy

California Supreme Court

Decided July 18, 1900No. S.F. No. 1273PublishedCited by 20 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtVan Dyke, J.

The demurrer to the complaint was sustained, and the appeal is taken from the judgment entered thereon. The sufficiency of the complaint is the only question presented on appeal. It is contended on the part of the appellants that the action is for the recovery of damages for a conspiracy between defendants to injure plaintiffs. The ease cited and relied upon to support this theory is Dreaux v. Domec, 18 Cal. 83. That was an action, however, for malicious prosecution. Several defendants were embraced in the action, the complaint averring “that the defendants contriving and maliciously…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Carpy v. DowdellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Holliday v. HollidayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Closson v. StaplesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1869
  4. Herron v. HughesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
  5. Taylor v. BidwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Revert v. HesseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Mox Incorporated v. WoodsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Bowman v. WohlkeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  4. White v. BrinkmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  5. Bealmear v. Southern Cal. Edison Co.California Supreme Court · 1943

15 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