Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

105 Cal. 254

Ingraham v. Lyon

California Supreme Court

Decided December 26, 1894

California Supreme Court · decided 1894-12-26

The complaint alleged, in substance, that defendants were members of a Merchants’ Protective and Collection Association, doing business iú Oakland; that they caused to be entered upon the “ black list ” of the association the following: “When entered, February 13, 1892; name of delinquent debtor, George Ingraham; occupation, porter; residence, 718 Henry street, when account closed, month, January, day, 2nd, year, 1892, amount, $14.25, by whom reported, J. L. Lyon & Son”;…

Relies on Edwards v. San Jose Printing & Publishing Society · Maynard v. Fireman's Fund Insurance

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1894-12-26

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently August 2007

9 state decisions

40189419001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

De Haven, J.

¶1Section 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.)

¶2Judgment reversed, with directions to overrule the demurrer to the complaint.

¶3McFarland J., and Fitzgerald, J., concurred.

¶4Hearing in Bank denied.

/105/cal/254 · .json · Public domain