Imperial Ice Co. v. Rossier
California Supreme Court
112 P.2d 631 (1941)
- Written by Mary Pfotenhauer, JD
Facts
Imperial Ice Company (plaintiff) acquired title to an ice distributing business in a contract with S.L. Coker. The contract contained a non-compete clause, under which Coker agreed not to sell or distribute ice within the territory. Coker later started selling ice in the territory, which was supplied by a company owned by W. Rossier, J.A. Matheson, and Fred Matheson (defendants). Imperial Ice sought an injunction against Rossier and the Mathesons to stop them from inducing Coker to breach the contract, claiming that they induced the breach in order to sell ice to Coker at a profit. The trial court sustained a demurrer to the complaint, and Imperial Ice now appeals.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Traynor, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 779,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.