Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

FRANK F. CLAYTON et al., Respondents, v. MRS. A.M. WILKINS, SR. et al.,Appellants.

THE COURT.

Defendants appeal from an order granting a preliminary injunction enjoining occupancy of certain lots of land by non-Caucasians.

Upon the authority of Shelley v. Kraemer (1948), 334 U.S. 1 [68 S.Ct. 836, 92 L.Ed. ___] (see also Hurd v. Hodge (1948), 334 U.S. 24 [68 S.Ct. 847, 92 L.Ed. ___]), holding that such restrictions cannot be enforced through court action, the order of the trial court granting the preliminary injunction must be reversed. (See also 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, ante, p. 892 [ 197 P.2d 161]; and Morin v. Crane, post, p. 896 [ 197 P.2d 162].)

For the reasons above stated the order appealed from is reversed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

CLAYTON v. WILKINS
(Sep 15, 1948)