Lincoln v. Grazer
Decision Date | 26 September 1958 |
Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Parties | A. LINCOLN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. A. Thomas GRAZER, H. W. Kennedy, K. N. Chantry, Wm. E. Fox, Bayard Rhone, and Eugene W. Biscailuz, Defendants and Respondents. Civ. 23014. |
A. Lincoln, in pro. per.
Harold W. Kennedy, County Counsel, and Robert C. Lynch, Deputy County Counsel, Los Angeles, for respondents.
Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment of dismissal entered on an order sustaining the demurrers of defendants to the original complaint without leave to amend.
The complaint alleges:
1. On August 14, 1957, defendants 'without warrant or legal right or authority, whatsoever, wilfully and maliciously caused, instigated, perpetrated, directed, procured, stirred up and agitated the arrest and impri[s]onment of the plaintiff, to his damage in the sum of $5,000.00'; they 'did so corruptly and by collusive arrangement among themselves, commonly known as a 'fix,' on a false, malicious, untrue and fabricated misdemeanor contempt charge without facts evidence or jurisdiction to support it.'
2. Defendants wilfully and maliciously deprived plaintiff of his right to secure legal counsel, held him without bail, and failed and refused to comply with sections 849 and 4001 of the Penal Code, 1 but 'forced plaintiff to be confined under maximum security to sleep on the floor, without proper care, in unfit, unsafe and overcrowded conditions, and in condemned detention facilities, thereby endangering his life, limbs and health to his further damage in the sum of $5,000.00.'
3. Defendants wilfully, maliciously, and corruptly failed to protect the rights, health, safety and well-being of plaintiff while he was thus unlawfully confined; but they caused, directed, encouraged, suffered, and permitted brutal assaults on plaintiff to his further damage in the sum of $5,000.
4. Defendants maliciously caused and directed jail trusties to spray plaintiff three times in five days with a strong and burning solution about his head and body to his damage in the sum of $750.
5. Defendants had an untrained and incompetent person--not a doctor, and not qualified to do so--carelessly, recklessly, and negligently, without the consent of plaintiff and without warrant or authority, jab plaintiff in the right arm with a needle and remove and extract blood from him to his damage in the sum of $250.
The prayer is for $16,000 damages.
Defendants Grazer, Chantry, Fox, Rhone, and Biscailuz demurred jointly on the grounds the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against them; it is uncertain and ambiguous in various particulars; and several causes of action are not separately stated. Defendant Kennedy filed a separate demurrer on the same grounds. The record does not disclose the ground or grounds on which the demurrers were sustained.
Hardy v. San Fernando Valley Chamber of Commerce, 99 Cal.App.2d 572, 577-578, 222 P.2d 314, 317. Unless it is clear that a complaint cannot be amended to state a cause of action, it is error to sustain a demurrer thereto...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Rhoden v. U.S.
...detains the [plaintiff] for an unreasonable period of time" after an otherwise legal seizure or arrest. Lincoln v. Grazer, 163 Cal.App.2d 758, 329 P.2d 928, 930 (1958). Once the plaintiff has proven the elements of the tort, the defendant has the burden to establish that the detention or ar......
-
M. G. Chamberlain & Co. v. Simpson
...278, 288-289, 295 P.2d 113; Skipper V. Gilbert J. Martin Constr. Co., 156 Cal.App.2d 82, 86, 318 P.2d 732; Lincoln v. Grazer, 163 Cal.App.2d 758, 760-761, 329 P.2d 928. Summarized, the allegations of ultimate fact are Count I At all times plaintiff M. G. Chamberlain & Company, a corporation......
-
Hagan v. Fairfield
...which could be remedied. It was, therefore, an abuse of discretion to sustain the demurrer without leave to amend. Lincoln v. Grazer, 163 Cal.App.2d 758, 761, 329 P.2d 928. Only in the event of a refusal to cure such defect by an amendment would a judgment of dismissal be proper. Keeler v. ......
-
Baker Aircraft Sales, Inc. v. Cassel
...should be sustained without leave to amend only if the complaint cannot be amended to state a cause of action. (Lincoln v. Grazer (1958) 163 Cal.App.2d 758, 761, 329 P.2d 928; Kauffman v. Bobo & Wood (1950) 99 Cal.App.2d 322, 323, 221 P.2d 750.) If the complaint states a cause of action on ......