Marshall

Marshall v. Brown

Bad Law
141 Cal. App. 3d 408·190 Cal. Rptr. 392·1983 Cal. App. LEXIS 1536
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 28, 1983Civ. 63658California3,864 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wisot, J.

PACTS

Plaintiff brought suit against a former employer as an individual and against the corporation principally owned and managed by him, charging wrongful interference with prospective employment. Her complaint sought recovery under two separate causes of action: she alleged slander, and sought compensatory and punitive damages; she also invoked the civil action authorized by Labor Code sections 1050 and 1054, and sought treble damages under the latter statute. Both causes of action were based on statements of defendant Brown relayed to plaintiff by means of a letter from another prospective employer. The letter advised that employment was denied because defendant Brown had given an unsatisfactory report on plaintiff as an employee. The letter summarized defendant’s statements to the effect that plaintiff was erratic in work hours, brought her personal problems to the office, had married another employee of defendant and caused that man to have a mental breakdown, and contradicted plaintiff’s reason for leaving defendant’s employ because of excessive overtime hours by saying that plaintiff never worked overtime.

In trial, plaintiff presented evidence showing that each…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.