gno.law

Clayton v. Wilkins

California Supreme Court · L. A. No. 20399 · 1948-09-15 · Published · 32 Cal. 2d 895

Area
civil

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion

32 Cal.2d 895 (1948) FRANK F. CLAYTON et al., Respondents, v. MRS. A. M. WILKINS, SR. et al., Appellants.

L. A. No. 20399. Supreme Court of California. In Bank.

Sept. 15, 1948. Gallagher, Margolis, McTernan & Tyre for Appellants.

Ray C. Eberhard and Elisabeth Eberhard Zeigler for Respondents.

Memorandum THE COURT.

Defendants appeal from an order granting a preliminary injunction enjoining occupancy of certain lots of land by non-Caucasians.

Upon the authority of Shelley v. Kraemer (1948), 334 U.S. 1 [68 S.Ct. 836, 92 L.Ed. __________] (see also Hurd v. Hodge (1948), 334 U.S. 24 [68 S.Ct. 847, 92 L.Ed. __________]), holding that such restrictions cannot be enforced through court action, the order of the trial court granting the preliminary injunction must be reversed. (See also Cumings v. Hokr (1948), 31 Cal.2d 844 [193 P.2d 742]; Cassell v. Hickerson (1948), 31 Cal.2d 869 [193 P.2d 743]; Davis v. Carter (1948), 31 Cal.2d 870 [193 P.2d 744]; In re Laws (1948), 31 Cal.2d 846 [193 P.2d 744]; Lippold v. Johnson, ante, p. 892 [197 P.2d 161]; and Morin v. Crane, post, p. 896 [197 P.2d 162].)

For the reasons above stated the order appealed from is reversed. *896

Cites, in this corpus

Cited by