Rutherford

Rutherford v. Johnson

Good Law
1967 Cal. App. LEXIS 2110·250 Cal. App. 2d 316·58 Cal. Rptr. 546
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 21, 1967Civ. 11361California1,439 words

Opinion

Opinion

Pierce, J.

A demurrer was sustained without leave to amend to plaintiff’s complaint against defendant. Ground of demurrer was that the complaint showed on its face that the action was barred by the statute of limitations. The appeal is from the judgment following the court order mentioned. We will affirm the judgment.

The complaint alleged, in the part here material, that on August 22, 1963, in a divorce action in which defendant was the defendant-husband he had filed an affidavit. The affidavit alleged that his ex-wife, who by the interlocutory decree in the divorce action had been awarded child custody, was not a fit and proper person to have such custody because of a meretricious relationship between her and the plaintiff in this action carried on in a manner deleteriously to affect the children. These statements, the complaint in the action before us alleges, were false and untrue and known by defendant to have been made upon an insufficient basis. Further underhanded behavior by defendant was alleged; that the latter knew “the local newspaper in Marysville and Yuba City made a custom and practice of printing excerpts from court documents such as the affidavit referred to” and that was…

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.