Legal Opinion

Jones v. Kmart Corp.

California Supreme Court

Decided January 29, 1998No. S058207PublishedCited by 128 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

MOSK, J.

Civil Code section 52.1 authorizes an action at law, a suit in equity, or both, against anyone who interferes, or tries to do so, by threats, intimidation, or coercion, with an individual’s exercise or enjoyment of rights secured by federal or state law. Subdivision (h) of section 52.1 permits a prevailing plaintiff to recover attorney fees. We must decide whether plaintiffs could recover damages on the basis of conduct by defendants that allegedly interfered with one plaintiff’s rights under the federal and state Constitutions’ search and seizure provisions. We hold that…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Griffin v. BreckenridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  3. Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. United States v. ClassicSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  5. Williams v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1968

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

3Cited by128 opinions

  1. Heriberto Rodriguez v. County of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
  2. Robert Reese, Jr. v. County of SacramentoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
  3. Cornell v. City & Cnty. of S.F., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
  4. Nelson v. City of IrvineCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
  5. Venegas v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004

123 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