Hale v. Morgan
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
RICHARDSON, J.
We consider constitutional challenges to Civil Code section 789.3, which assesses a penalty of $100 per day against a landlord who wilfully deprives his tenant of utility services for the purpose of evicting the tenant. We will conclude that the penalties provided by the section, while surviving an attack on the grounds of equal protection of the laws, may, under particular circumstances, violate the due process provisions of both the federal and our state Constitutions, and that the $17,300 sanction herein imposed was excessive. We will, accordingly, reverse the judgment…
2Cases cited53 opinions
- Roe v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Griswold v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Williamson v. Lee Optical of Oklahoma, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
- Boddie v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Palko v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
48 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by279 opinions
- People v. Dueñas, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- People v. YeomanCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- Tobe v. City of Santa AnaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
- People v. HinesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
- People ex rel. Lungren v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1996
274 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.