Healy

Healy v. Young

Good Law
18 Cal. Rptr. 359·1962 Cal. App. LEXIS 2911·198 Cal. App. 2d 834
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 9, 1962Civ. No. 25220California1,086 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Shinn, J.

Plaintiff instituted the present action against Mobile Hacienda Park Co. (referred to as Mobile) and Elmer H. Young, Sr., Alan P. Salter, Merwin C. Estes, Marcel Schmidt and Frederick W. Stearns. The demurrers of all the defendants were sustained and plaintiff amended his complaint. All defendants demurred to the amended complaint. The demurrer of Mobile to the second cause of action was overruled. The court did not rule upon Mobile’s demurrer to any of the other causes of action. The demurrers of all individual defendants were sustained as to all causes of action.. Plaintiff declined to amend and judgment was entered in favor of the individual defendants that plaintiff recover nothing against them. The corporation, which is still before the trial court on demurrer, is not a party to the appeal. The question before us is whether the amended complaint states .a cause of action against any of the individual defendants.

The first cause of action alleges an indebtedness of the corporation to plaintiff in the sum of $2,543.11 as the balance of compensation due plaintiff for services rendered at the instance and request of the corporation, as a result of which the corporation acquired…

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.