Law v. Crist

California Court of Appeal Dec 10, 1940 No. Civ. 11559Published

Before: Sturtevant

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that an unincorporated association is entitled to injunctive relief against a corporation that adopts a confusingly similar name, regardless of whether the association is engaged in business for profit.

Issues

Whether the plaintiffs' complaint was sufficient to state a cause of action for injunctive relief.
Whether the plaintiffs had the legal capacity to sue as an unincorporated association.
Whether the trial court erred in granting an injunction against the defendants' use of the association's name.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The right to injunction in such cases has furthermore been determined to be dependent neither upon the actual showing of specific injury nor the misleading of any particular person”

“The record shows a flagrant violation by defendants of the rights of the plaintiffs.”

STURTEVANT, J.

In 1909 the plaintiffs and their associates, including the defendants Crist and Staley, were a

[864]

group working together to advance and disseminate the teachings of theosophy as expounded by the writings of H. P. Blavatsky and William I. Judge. At or about the date last mentioned they acted under the name of United Lodge of Theosophists. Until the events hereinafter to be mentioned they so acted and maintained a meeting place in Los Angeles. Similar lodges were and are in existence in populous centers in America and elsewhere. All worked and cooperated to accomplish the same general purposes.

In 1937 several members, including the defendants Crist and Staley, withdrew from the lodge at Los Angeles and attempted to start an organization having the same general purposes. They formed a corporation under the name of United Lodge of Theosophists, Inc., and proceeded' to act under that name. On July 21, 1937, the plaintiffs commenced this action to obtain a decree enjoining the corporation and the board of directors thereof from using said name. The defendants Crist, Staley and United Lodge of Theosophists, Inc., severally answered. The trial court made findings in favor of the plaintiffs and those defendants who answered appealed from the judgment.

Before answering each of the defendants, Crist, Staley and United Lodge of Theosophists, Inc., severally filed demurrers. The demurrers were both general and special. Each made many attacks on the plaintiffs’ complaint. However each demurrer was overruled. The defendants now claim the trial court erred in overruling said demurrers. We find no merit in that claim. The complaint was drawn in conformity with the pleading that was under attack in

Hooper

Stone,

54 Cal. App. 668 [202 Pac. 485]. On the authority of that ease we have no hesitancy in saying that the complaint in the case before us is sufficient. As to many of the special attacks the defendants merely repeat the allegations made in the demurrer. In others, without citing any authority, they do no more than to assert that the plaintiffs should have alleged certain probative facts. Such attacks are insufficient presentations. (2 Cal. Jur. 726 “Appeal and Error”, sees. 418-423.)

Law v. Crist

AI Brief

STURTEVANT, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief