Hawthorne

Hawthorne v. Siegel

Good Law
1891 Cal. LEXIS 665·88 Cal. 159·25 P. 1114
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 2, 1891No. 13868California2,114 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Foote, J.

This action was brought to recover damages for trespass alleged to have been committed by the defendants in “breaking and entering ” upon the premises held, used, and possessed by the plaintiffs under a lease, and “forcibly and unlawfully altering and changing the construction” of the premises, “by lowering a portion of the ceiling ” thereof, “ and by closing up and obstructing the windows and gratings thereof through which plaintiff obtained light and air for their said premises.”

It was further alleged that these acts of the defendants rendered the premises “totally unfit and useless” for the purposes of their business, which was that of carrying on a barber-shop and bath-room; that they were thereby compelled to vacate the premises, and did vacate them under this compulsion on the third day of September, 1888, the lease not expiring until the 26th of April, 1891.

The damages claimed were, from the loss of the established trade and business of the plaintiffs; from that occasioned by having to abandon a portion of the permanent improvements which they had made on the leased premises; from thafr resulting from the plaintiffs being compelled to abandon and lose the benefit of…

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.