Hanson v. Webb
Before: Heydenfeldt
Synopsis
In an action brought to recover damages by the owners of a licensed ferry, against a party alleged to have run a ferry within the limits prohibited by law, it was held, that the complaint should have alleged that defendant ran his ferry for a fee or reward, or the promise or expectation of it, or that he ran it for other than his own personal use or that of his family, and that the omission of these allegations was fatal.
Heydenfeldt, Justice, delivered the opinion of the court. Wells, Justice, concurred.
The declaration in this case is too defective to sustain the judgment. It should have alleged that the defendant ran his ferry for fee or reward, or the promise or expectation of it, or that he ran it for other than his own personal use, or that of his family. Such are the only events in which the statute does not give to the owner of a licensed ferry protection against the infringement of his franchise.
The general demurrer to the declaration was properly taken, and ought to have been sustained by the District Court.
The judgment is reversed, and the case remanded.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)