gno.law

Ingraham v. Lyon

California Supreme Court · No. 15514 · 1894-12-26 · Published · 105 Cal. 254 · 38 P. 892 · 1894 Cal. LEXIS 1145

GEORGE INGRAHAM v. J. L. LYON

Area
civil
Panel
Thomas E. Haven (author)

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 — Haven

De Haven, J.

Section 452 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides: “In the construction of a pleading, for the purpose of determining its effect, its allegations must be liberally construed with a view to substantial justice between the parties.” The complaint in this action is certainly very loosely drawn, but, applying to it this rule of construction, it may be held to allege in substance that defendants intended by the written publication complained of to charge and have it understood and believed “ that plaintiff was a person engaged in making accounts which he never paid or intended to pay, and was dishonest and wholly unfit and unworthy of credit”; that said publication was understood by those to whom it was made as conveying such meaning and charge against the plaintiff; and that such publication was made without cause, “ and out of pure malice.” Thus construed, the complaint states a cause of action. (Maynard v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co., 47 Cal. 207. See, also, Edwards v. San Jose etc. Publishing Society, 99 Cal. 435.)

Judgment reversed, with directions to overrule the demurrer to the complaint.

McFarland J., and Fitzgerald, J., concurred.

Hearing in Bank denied.

Cites, in this corpus

Cited by