Court Opinion

ID: 2620191
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-10-30 11:54:51.981918+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:11:51.722240
License: Public Domain

33 Cal. 2d 703 (1949)
E. D. COLEMAN et al., Respondents,
v.
THOMAS STEWART et al., Appellants.
S. F. No. 17319. 
Supreme Court of California. In Bank.  
Mar. 31, 1949.
 Gladstein, Andersen, Resner, Sawyer & Edises, Bertram Edises and George R. Vaughns for Appellants.
 George F. Sharp for Respondents.
 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. *704