Mayo v. Madden

California Supreme Court

Mayo v. Madden

4 Cal. 28

California Supreme Court·Decided January 15, 1854·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

*Mr. J. HeydEneeldt

delivered the opinion of the [28] Court.

Mr. Ch. J. Murray concurred.

In this action there is united a claim for damages, for a personal tort, and a demand properly cognizable in a court of equity. Whatever may be the liberality claimed for our present practice, it certainly cannot be extended to such a misjoinder as this declaration contains.

The judgment on demurrer is affirmed, with leave to the plaintiff to amend.

Let the cause be remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

*Mr. J. HeydEneeldt

delivered the opinion of the [28] Court.

Mr. Ch. J. Murray concurred.

In this action there is united a claim for damages, for a personal tort, and a demand properly cognizable in a court of equity. Whatever may be the liberality claimed for our present practice, it certainly cannot be extended to such a misjoinder as this declaration contains.

The judgment on demurrer is affirmed, with leave to the plaintiff to amend.

Let the cause be remanded.

Mayo v. Madden, 4 Cal. 28 (Cal. 1854).

Pincite

4 Cal. 28 (Mayo v. Madden) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related