Bradley

Bradley v. Doherty

Good Law
106 Cal. Rptr. 725·1973 Cal. App. LEXIS 1226·30 Cal. App. 3d 991
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 1, 1973Civ. Nos. 31151, 30953California2,527 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Bray, J.

Plaintiff appeals from two separate but related orders of the San Mateo County Superior Court: (1) judgment sustaining demurrer without leave to amend the fifth cause of action (1/Civil 31151), and (2) order dissolving temporary injunction and denying plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunction (1/Civil 30953).

*993 Question Presented

Is the doctrine of in pari delicto unconstitutional when applied to an action to recover money lost in “fixed” gambling?

Record

Appellant’s complaint contains nine causes of action. The first cause of action alleges that respondents operated a cocktail lounge and bar known as the Orchid Room in a negligent manner, in that they knowingly allowed “latent defects to exist on the premises” whereby appellant was damaged in the sum of $70,000. The second cause of action alleges that respondents were negligent and careless in the operation and conduct of the Orchid Room business, causing damage to appellant’s property. The third cause of action alleges that respondents so negligently, wilfully and wantonly misconducted themselves in failing to properly supervise, conduct and operate respondents’ business as to cause damage to plaintiff’s…

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.