Black v. Browne

DORAN, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment based upon an order sustaining a demurrer to the plaintiff’s complaint without leave to amend.

The original complaint asked for declaratory relief and damages against the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees and Moving Picture Machine Operators of the United States and Canada, Hollywood and Culver City Studio Local No. 37 thereof, and certain officials of said unions, both as officers and individuals, as defendants in said action. A demurrer to said complaint was sustained with

[607]

leave to amend. A first amended complaint followed, to which a demurrer was sustained with leave to amend. In a second amended complaint setting up two causes of action, a demurrer was sustained with leave to amend as to the second count only. A third amended complaint was then filed which was limited to one cause of action for damages alleged to have resulted from a loss of wages. Briefly, it was alleged that defendants, in their individual capacity, conspired to “Mack list” plaintiff and deprive him of employment. The third amended complaint was essentially different, notably in the fact that the unions named as defendants in the former complaints were eliminated as parties defendant, and the alleged cause of action was directed against certain individuals only.

It is from the judgment based upon an order sustaining defendants’ demurrer to this last-mentioned third amended complaint, without leave to amend, that plaintiff appeals.

Upon submission for decision of the issues raised by defendants’ demurrer, plaintiff specifically requested leave to amend in the event the demurrer was sustained.

It is urged on appeal that the judgment based upon an order sustaining the demurrer, in the circumstances above recited, was an abuse of discretion.

Respondents submit that the questions presented are, First: “whether third parties are liable to an employee for preventing his employment by a particular employer, in the absence of a contract of employment (other than an employment at will) where the third parties did not use unlawful means such as force, fear or intimidation”; and second: whether “the appellant so stated his case as to sufficiently show facts giving rise to a cause of action”.