Coleman v. Stewart , 33 Cal.2d 703
[S. F. No. 17319. In Bank. Mar. 31, 1949.]
E. D. COLEMAN et al., Respondents, v. THOMAS STEWART et al., Appellants.
COUNSEL
Gladstein, Andersen, Resner, Sawyer & Edises, Bertram Edises and George R. Vaughns for Appellants.
George F. Sharp for Respondents.
OPINION
THE COURT.
This case involves the legality and enforceability of privately imposed restrictions against occupation of a lot of land by non-Caucasians. The trial court enjoined occupance of the lot by defendants, non-Caucasians. Defendants appealed.
[1] Upon the authority of Shelley v. Kraemer (1948), 334 U.S. 1 [68 S.Ct. 836, 92 L.Ed. 1161, 3 A.L.R.2d 441] (see, also, Hurd v. Hodge (1948), 334 U.S. 24 [68 S.Ct. 847, 92 L.Ed. 1187]), holding that such restrictions cannot be enforced through court action, the judgment of the trial court must be reversed. (See Cumings v. Hokr (1948), 31 Cal.2d 844 [193 P.2d 742]; Cassell v. Hickerson (1948), 31 Cal.2d 869 [193 P.2d 743]; Davis v. Carter (1948), 31 Cal.2d 870 [193 P.2d 744]; In re Laws (1948), 31 Cal.2d 846 [193 P.2d 744]; Lippold v. Johnson (1948), 32 Cal.2d 892 [197 P.2d 161]; Clayton v. Wilkins (1948), 32 Cal.2d 895 [197 P.2d 162]; Morin v. Crane (1948), 32 Cal.2d 896 [197 P.2d 162].)
For the reason above stated the order appealed from is reversed. [33 Cal.2d 704]
Opinion Information
Parties
| 1 | E. D. COLEMAN et al. (Respondent)
|
| 2 | s, v. THOMAS STEWART et al., Appellants. (s, v. THOMAS STEWART et al.)
|
| 3 | E. D. COLEMAN et al. (Respondent)
|
| Disposition |
| Mar 31 1949 | Opinion: Reversed |
