Legal Opinion
Gill v. Hearst Publishing Co.
California Supreme Court
Decided February 17, 1953No. L. A. 22038PublishedCited by 79 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSpence, J.
As in the related case of Gill v. Curtis Pub. Co., 38 Cal.2d 273 [239 P.2d 630], plaintiffs, husband and wife, sought damages for an alleged invasion of their right of privacy. Defendants’ demurrer to the amended complaint was sustained without leave to amend. From the judgment accordingly entered, plaintiffs appeal. It appears that plaintiffs properly challenge the correctness of the trial court’s ruling insofar as it foreclosed their right to amend.
Plaintiffs’ original complaint was predicated solely on the charge that in the October, 1947, issue of Harper’s Bazaar, a magazine published and…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Lovell v. City of GriffinSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Winters v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Pavesich v. New England Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
- Wennerholm v. Stanford University School of MedicineCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by79 opinions
- Hill v. National Collegiate Athletic Assn.California Supreme Court · 1994
- Crump v. Beckley Newspapers, Inc.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1984
- Briscoe v. Reader's Digest Association, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1971
- Shulman v. Group W Productions, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1998
- Kapellas v. KofmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
74 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.