Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 California opinions name it 2 courts 1923–1966 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Warfield v. Bassogreen2 sentences1966However, it is the general rule that “where the facts stated in the complaint show that the plaintiff is entitled to damages of some sort, it is not a fatal *542 error that the pleader has mistaken the rule by which such damages should be determined.” (Warfield v. Basso, 62 Cal. App. 47, 49 [ 216 P. 48 ].) In Hartzell v. Myall, 115 Cal.App.2d 670, 677-678 [ 252 P.2d 676 ], the court states: “Appellant evidently has failed to distinguish between the remedy or relief which the law affords for the invasion of a right, and the cause of action or ground for the relief. 1966However, it is the general rule that “where the facts stated in the complaint show that the plaintiff is entitled to damages of some sort, it is not a fatal *542 error that the pleader has mistaken the rule by which such damages should be determined.” (Warfield v. Basso, 62 Cal. App. 47, 49 [ 216 P. 48 ].) In Hartzell v. Myall, 115 Cal.App.2d 670, 677-678 [ 252 P.2d 676 ], the court states: “Appellant evidently has failed to distinguish between the remedy or relief which the law affords for the invasion of a right, and the cause of action or ground for the relief. | 3 | 4 |
Eatwell v. Beckgreen2 sentences1955Cook & Co. v. White Truck etc. Co., 124 Cal.App. 721, 726 [ 13 P.2d 549 ] : “If respondent is entitled to recover, the fact that he seeks damages according to the wrong measure is inconsequential and does not preclude the court from according him the damages to which he is entitled according to their true measure.” Numerous cases exemplifying this rule are collected in Eatwell v. Beck, 41 Cal.2d 128, 136 [ 257 P.2d 643 ], where it is said: “Our conclusion that the amendment should have been allowed is in accord with the general rule that where ‘the facts stated in the complaint show that the p 1955Cook & Co. v. White Truck etc. Co., 124 Cal.App. 721, 726 [ 13 P.2d 549 ] : “If respondent is entitled to recover, the fact that he seeks damages according to the wrong measure is inconsequential and does not preclude the court from according him the damages to which he is entitled according to their true measure.” Numerous cases exemplifying this rule are collected in Eatwell v. Beck, 41 Cal.2d 128, 136 [ 257 P.2d 643 ], where it is said: “Our conclusion that the amendment should have been allowed is in accord with the general rule that where ‘the facts stated in the complaint show that the p | 2 | 2 |
Hartzell v. Myallgreen2 sentences1966However, it is the general rule that “where the facts stated in the complaint show that the plaintiff is entitled to damages of some sort, it is not a fatal *542 error that the pleader has mistaken the rule by which such damages should be determined.” (Warfield v. Basso, 62 Cal. App. 47, 49 [ 216 P. 48 ].) In Hartzell v. Myall, 115 Cal.App.2d 670, 677-678 [ 252 P.2d 676 ], the court states: “Appellant evidently has failed to distinguish between the remedy or relief which the law affords for the invasion of a right, and the cause of action or ground for the relief. 1966However, it is the general rule that “where the facts stated in the complaint show that the plaintiff is entitled to damages of some sort, it is not a fatal *542 error that the pleader has mistaken the rule by which such damages should be determined.” (Warfield v. Basso, 62 Cal. App. 47, 49 [ 216 P. 48 ].) In Hartzell v. Myall, 115 Cal.App.2d 670, 677-678 [ 252 P.2d 676 ], the court states: “Appellant evidently has failed to distinguish between the remedy or relief which the law affords for the invasion of a right, and the cause of action or ground for the relief. | 1 | 1 |
Youngblood v. City of Los Angelesgreen2 sentences1964(Saari v. Superior Court, 178 Cal.App.2d 175, 178 [ 2 Cal.Rptr. 856 ] ; Youngblood v. City of Los Angeles, 160 Cal.App.2d 481 [ 325 P.2d 587 ].) Although the right to amend should be denied if a change is made in the liability sought to be enforced against the defendant (Klopstock v. Superior Court, 17 Cal.2d 13, 20 [ 108 P.2d 906 , 135 A.L.R. 318 ]; Youngblood v. City of Los Angeles, 160 Cal.App.2d 481, 492 [ 325 P.2d 587 ]), or if it appears to a certainty that no basic right of action can possibly exist or no relief can possibly be granted (Miller v. McLaglen, 82 Cal.App.2d 219, 228 [ 186 P 1964(Saari v. Superior Court, 178 Cal.App.2d 175, 178 [ 2 Cal.Rptr. 856 ] ; Youngblood v. City of Los Angeles, 160 Cal.App.2d 481 [ 325 P.2d 587 ].) Although the right to amend should be denied if a change is made in the liability sought to be enforced against the defendant (Klopstock v. Superior Court, 17 Cal.2d 13, 20 [ 108 P.2d 906 , 135 A.L.R. 318 ]; Youngblood v. City of Los Angeles, 160 Cal.App.2d 481, 492 [ 325 P.2d 587 ]), or if it appears to a certainty that no basic right of action can possibly exist or no relief can possibly be granted (Miller v. McLaglen, 82 Cal.App.2d 219, 228 [ 186 P | 1 | 1 |
Klopstock v. Superior Courtgreen2 sentences1964(Saari v. Superior Court, 178 Cal.App.2d 175, 178 [ 2 Cal.Rptr. 856 ] ; Youngblood v. City of Los Angeles, 160 Cal.App.2d 481 [ 325 P.2d 587 ].) Although the right to amend should be denied if a change is made in the liability sought to be enforced against the defendant (Klopstock v. Superior Court, 17 Cal.2d 13, 20 [ 108 P.2d 906 , 135 A.L.R. 318 ]; Youngblood v. City of Los Angeles, 160 Cal.App.2d 481, 492 [ 325 P.2d 587 ]), or if it appears to a certainty that no basic right of action can possibly exist or no relief can possibly be granted (Miller v. McLaglen, 82 Cal.App.2d 219, 228 [ 186 P 1964(Saari v. Superior Court, 178 Cal.App.2d 175, 178 [ 2 Cal.Rptr. 856 ] ; Youngblood v. City of Los Angeles, 160 Cal.App.2d 481 [ 325 P.2d 587 ].) Although the right to amend should be denied if a change is made in the liability sought to be enforced against the defendant (Klopstock v. Superior Court, 17 Cal.2d 13, 20 [ 108 P.2d 906 , 135 A.L.R. 318 ]; Youngblood v. City of Los Angeles, 160 Cal.App.2d 481, 492 [ 325 P.2d 587 ]), or if it appears to a certainty that no basic right of action can possibly exist or no relief can possibly be granted (Miller v. McLaglen, 82 Cal.App.2d 219, 228 [ 186 P | 1 | 1 |
Bice v. Stevensgreen2 sentences1964(Eatwell v. Beck, 41 Cal.2d 128, 136 [ 257 P.2d 643 ]; Bice v. Stevens, 136 Cal.App.2d 368, 374, 379 [ 289 P.2d 95 ].) In the case at bench the petitioners are not attempting to introduce an entirely new cause by the proposed second amended complaint but merely propose a change of theory in their action against defendants. 1964(Eatwell v. Beck, 41 Cal.2d 128, 136 [ 257 P.2d 643 ]; Bice v. Stevens, 136 Cal.App.2d 368, 374, 379 [ 289 P.2d 95 ].) In the case at bench the petitioners are not attempting to introduce an entirely new cause by the proposed second amended complaint but merely propose a change of theory in their action against defendants. | 1 | 1 |
Miller v. McLaglengreen2 sentences1964(Saari v. Superior Court, 178 Cal.App.2d 175, 178 [ 2 Cal.Rptr. 856 ] ; Youngblood v. City of Los Angeles, 160 Cal.App.2d 481 [ 325 P.2d 587 ].) Although the right to amend should be denied if a change is made in the liability sought to be enforced against the defendant (Klopstock v. Superior Court, 17 Cal.2d 13, 20 [ 108 P.2d 906 , 135 A.L.R. 318 ]; Youngblood v. City of Los Angeles, 160 Cal.App.2d 481, 492 [ 325 P.2d 587 ]), or if it appears to a certainty that no basic right of action can possibly exist or no relief can possibly be granted (Miller v. McLaglen, 82 Cal.App.2d 219, 228 [ 186 P 1964(Saari v. Superior Court, 178 Cal.App.2d 175, 178 [ 2 Cal.Rptr. 856 ] ; Youngblood v. City of Los Angeles, 160 Cal.App.2d 481 [ 325 P.2d 587 ].) Although the right to amend should be denied if a change is made in the liability sought to be enforced against the defendant (Klopstock v. Superior Court, 17 Cal.2d 13, 20 [ 108 P.2d 906 , 135 A.L.R. 318 ]; Youngblood v. City of Los Angeles, 160 Cal.App.2d 481, 492 [ 325 P.2d 587 ]), or if it appears to a certainty that no basic right of action can possibly exist or no relief can possibly be granted (Miller v. McLaglen, 82 Cal.App.2d 219, 228 [ 186 P | 1 | 1 |
Saari v. Superior Courtgreen2 sentences1964(Saari v. Superior Court, 178 Cal.App.2d 175, 178 [ 2 Cal.Rptr. 856 ] ; Youngblood v. City of Los Angeles, 160 Cal.App.2d 481 [ 325 P.2d 587 ].) Although the right to amend should be denied if a change is made in the liability sought to be enforced against the defendant (Klopstock v. Superior Court, 17 Cal.2d 13, 20 [ 108 P.2d 906 , 135 A.L.R. 318 ]; Youngblood v. City of Los Angeles, 160 Cal.App.2d 481, 492 [ 325 P.2d 587 ]), or if it appears to a certainty that no basic right of action can possibly exist or no relief can possibly be granted (Miller v. McLaglen, 82 Cal.App.2d 219, 228 [ 186 P 1964(Saari v. Superior Court, 178 Cal.App.2d 175, 178 [ 2 Cal.Rptr. 856 ] ; Youngblood v. City of Los Angeles, 160 Cal.App.2d 481 [ 325 P.2d 587 ].) Although the right to amend should be denied if a change is made in the liability sought to be enforced against the defendant (Klopstock v. Superior Court, 17 Cal.2d 13, 20 [ 108 P.2d 906 , 135 A.L.R. 318 ]; Youngblood v. City of Los Angeles, 160 Cal.App.2d 481, 492 [ 325 P.2d 587 ]), or if it appears to a certainty that no basic right of action can possibly exist or no relief can possibly be granted (Miller v. McLaglen, 82 Cal.App.2d 219, 228 [ 186 P | 1 | 1 |
W. C. Cook & Co. v. White Truck & Transfer Co.green2 sentences1955Cook & Co. v. White Truck etc. Co., 124 Cal.App. 721, 726 [ 13 P.2d 549 ] : “If respondent is entitled to recover, the fact that he seeks damages according to the wrong measure is inconsequential and does not preclude the court from according him the damages to which he is entitled according to their true measure.” Numerous cases exemplifying this rule are collected in Eatwell v. Beck, 41 Cal.2d 128, 136 [ 257 P.2d 643 ], where it is said: “Our conclusion that the amendment should have been allowed is in accord with the general rule that where ‘the facts stated in the complaint show that the p 1955Cook & Co. v. White Truck etc. Co., 124 Cal.App. 721, 726 [ 13 P.2d 549 ] : “If respondent is entitled to recover, the fact that he seeks damages according to the wrong measure is inconsequential and does not preclude the court from according him the damages to which he is entitled according to their true measure.” Numerous cases exemplifying this rule are collected in Eatwell v. Beck, 41 Cal.2d 128, 136 [ 257 P.2d 643 ], where it is said: “Our conclusion that the amendment should have been allowed is in accord with the general rule that where ‘the facts stated in the complaint show that the p | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Brickner Woolen Mills Co. v. Henry
neutral
2 sentences1952While the court under the allegations of the complaint and its equity powers could have awarded plaintiffs general damages if there were evidence to support such an award (see Brickner Woolen Mills Co. v. Henry, 73 Wis. 229 [ 40 N.W. 809 ]), the court did not do so. 1952While the court under the allegations of the complaint and its equity powers could have awarded plaintiffs general damages if there were evidence to support such an award (see Brickner Woolen Mills Co. v. Henry, 73 Wis. 229 [ 40 N.W. 809 ]), the court did not do so. | 1 | 1952–1952 |
Hudson v. Archer
green
1 sentence1923In Hudson v. Archer, 4 S. D. 128 [ 55 N. W. 1099 ], which was an appeal from an order sustaining a demurrer to a complaint, the court said: “As we have seen, an erroneous claim for damages or demand for relief is not a ground of demurrer. | 1 | 1923–1923 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.