Williamson v. Blattan

Decided July 1, 1858

California Supreme Court · decided 1858-07-01

This was an action instituted against the defendants to recover from them the sum of 6372 46. The action was brought on an undertaking executed by the defendants to release certain property, seized and held by attachment in a certain suit wherein Teal and Post were plaintiffs, and Davidson and Stevens were defendants.

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“First. — -That the complaint does not adduce facts sufficient to determine a cause of action.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Catoni v. Martorell de Prado

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1858-07-01

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently May 1928

3 state decisions

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 →

Field, J., delivered the opinion of the Court—Terry, C. J., and Burnett, J., concurring.

¶1This is an action upon an undertaking executed to release property from an attachment. The complaint does not aver that the property attached was released upon the delivery of the undertaking. In this respect it is defective, and the defect' is one which may be taken advantage of under a demurrer, on the ground that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action without further specification. (Palmer v. Melvin et al., 6 Cal., 651; Haire v. Baker, 1 Selden, 857; Johnson v. Wetmore, 12 Barbour, 433 ; Ellissen v. Halleck, 6 Cal., 386.)

¶2It follows that the Court erred in overruling the demurrer. Judgment reversed, and cause remanded, with leave to the plaintiffs to amend their complaint.