Legal Opinion

Lorah v. Biscailuz

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 24, 1936No. Civ. 10698PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GOULD, J., pro tem.

Plaintiff, alleging physical injury and false imprisonment when she was arrested upon a felony charge, brought suit for damages against the arresting officer, who was a deputy sheriff of Los Angeles County, and against the sheriff of said county and the latter’s official bondsmen. ■A general demurrer on behalf of the sheriff and his bondsmen was sustained without leave to amend, and from the resulting judgment plaintiff appeals. '

While the general rule is that a sheriff is liable for the torts of his deputies committed in the performance of the latters’ official acts or…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Michel v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Foley v. MartinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Abbott v. CooperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Sunter v. FraserCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. People v. Standard Accident Insurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1941
  2. Van Vorce v. ThomasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  3. State v. ReichertIndiana Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Union Bank & Trust Co. v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
  5. Bowman v. HaywardUtah Supreme Court · 1953

2 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