gno.law

Davis v. Carter

California Supreme Court · L. A. No. 19696 · 1948-05-18 · Published · 31 Cal. 2d 870 · 193 P.2d 744

EDYTHE G. DAVIS v. BENNY CARTER, Respondents and other cases

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

THE COURT.

These cases, like Cumings v. Hokr, ante, p. 844 [193 P.2d 742], Cassell v. Hickerson, ante, p. 869 [193 P.2d 743], and In re Laws, ante, p. 846 [193 P.2d 744], this day filed, involve the legality and enforceability of privately imposed restrictions against occupation of certain lots of land by persons other than those of the Caucasian race. Upon the authority of Shelley v. Kraemer and McGhee V. Sipes, May 3, 1948, 334 U.S. 1 [68 S.Ct. 836, 92 L.Ed.-, 16 Law Week 4426] (see also Hurd v. Hodge, May 3, 1948, 334 U.S. 24 [68 S.Ct. 847, 92 L.Ed.-, 16 Law Week 4432]), holding that such restrictions cannot be enforced through court action, the judgment of the trial court refusing to enforce the restrictions is in each case affirmed.

Cites, in this corpus

Cited by