Legal Opinion
Kendall-Jackson Winery, Ltd. v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 3, 2000No. F033305PublishedCited by 64 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
THAXTER, Acting P. J.
The doctrine of unclean hands does not deny relief to a plaintiff guilty of any past misconduct; only misconduct directly related to the matter in which he seeks relief triggers the defense. (11 Witkin, Summary of Cal. Law (9th ed. 1990) Equity, § 10, p. 686.) The trial court found that Kendall-Jackson Winery, Ltd. (Kendall-Jackson), the defendant in a malicious prosecution action, had no relevant evidence that the plaintiff, E. & J. Gallo Winery (Gallo), acted with unclean hands in relation to its claim and ordered summary adjudication for the plaintiff on…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Precision Instrument Manufacturing Co. v. Automotive Maintenance MacHinery Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Keystone Driller Co. v. General Excavator Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Turner v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1994
- Fibreboard Paper Products Corp. v. East Bay Union of MacHinists, Local 1304California Court of Appeal · 1964
- Kendall-Jackson Winery, Limited v. E. & J. Gallo Winery, a California Corporation, Dba Turning Leaf VineyardsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by64 opinions
- Fladeboe v. American Isuzu Motors Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2007
- Peregrine Funding, Inc. v. Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLPCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- Giraldo v. Department of Corrections & RehabilitationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Biller v. Toyota Motor Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
- Brown v. GrimesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.