Herz

Diamond View Limited v. Herz

Good Law
180 Cal. App. 3d 612·1986 Cal. App. LEXIS 1533·225 Cal. Rptr. 651
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 30, 1986Civ. 25800California4,079 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sparks, J.

Code of Civil Procedure section 527.6 authorizes a “person” who has been harassed to obtain an injunction prohibiting any further ha rassment. The principal question in this case is whether a business entity is a person within the meaning of the statute. We hold that it is not.

Defendant Paul Herz appeals from the granting of an injunction pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 527.6 restraining him from alarming, annoying or harassing Diamond View Ltd. (Diamond View), a limited partnership, and its manager, Kit Doering.(Doering), and requiring him to remain outside the premises of two taverns owned by Diamond View. Defendant contends that a limited partnership is not a person in whose favor an injunction can be granted under the statute. He further contends that the pleadings did not allege a knowing and willful course of conduct aimed at a specific person and for that reason the injunction was also improperly issued in favor of Ms. Doering. Finally, he asserts that there are procedural irregularities in the cost bill filed in this case.

In the published portion of this opinion we consider and resolve the first contention. In the unpublished portion we consider…

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.