Arcega

People Ex Rel. Bradford v. Arcega

Good Law
1920 Cal. App. LEXIS 810·49 Cal. App. 239·193 P. 264
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 10, 1920Civ. No. 2148.California2,542 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Hart, J.

The action is prosecuted under what is known as the “Red-light Abatement Act” (Stats. 1913, p. 20).

The complaint alleges that the premises and building known as “No. 222 L Street,” in the city of Sacramento, and described as the “East one-half of Lot No. three, in the block or square bounded by and between L and M and Second and Third Streets of said city of Sacramento,” were, and for some time prior to the third day of January, 1918, “and ever since that date, and now are, used for the purposes of lewdness, assignation and prostitution, and upon said premises acts of lewdness, assignation and prostitution were held and did occur, and said premises were and now are a nuisance under the laws of the state of California.” It is further alleged that the appellant, Arcega, is the owner of said property and premises, and that the respondents, George W. Locke & Son, á corporation, and certain fictitiously named parties, “have and claim some interest in and lien upon said real property, and that the respondents, George W. Locke & Son, Jane Coe and Susan Hoe et al. (fictitiously designated), are the owners of the furniture, fixtures, musical instruments and other movable property…

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.