Hawkins v. Hawkins
Cases that cite this one
50 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- L.A. & Redondo R.R. v. New Liverpool Salt Co. (Cal. 1906)
- Casey v. Proctor (Cal. 1963)
- McClure v. Cerati (Cal. Ct. App. 1948)
- California Trust Co. v. Cohn (Cal. 1932)
- Pellicier v. Fernández (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico 1913)
- Fuentes v. Empire Nissan (Cal. 2026)
- Iyere v. Wise Auto Group (Cal. Ct. App. 2023)
- Prostek v. Lincare Inc. (United States District Court for the Eastern District of California 2023)
- Behm v. Fireside Thrift Co. (Cal. Ct. App. 1969)
- Frankini v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n (Cal. Ct. App. 1936)
- Daily Telegram Co. v. Long Beach Press Publishing Co. (Cal. Ct. App. 1933)
- Gajanich v. Gregory (Cal. Ct. App. 1931)
- Fraters Glass & Paint Co. v. Southwestern Construction Co. (Cal. Ct. App. 1930)
- Greve v. Taft Realty Co. (Cal. Ct. App. 1929)
- State Ex Rel. Brown v. Trimble (Mo. 1929)
- Mazuran v. Stefanich (Cal. Ct. App. 1928)
- Ferro v. Los Angeles First National Trust & Savings Bank (Cal. Ct. App. 1928)
- Dale v. Dale (Cal. Ct. App. 1927)
- Russell v. Riley & Peterson (Cal. Ct. App. 1927)
- Natl. Union Fire Ins. Co. v. Peck (Tex. App. 1927)
- King v. Globe Grain & Milling Co. (Cal. Ct. App. 1922)
- Fulp v. Squires (Okla. 1920)
- Morstad v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry Co. (N.M. 1918)
- Manley v. Smith (Or. 1918)
- Fontron v. Kruse (Kan. 1918)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The demurrer was properly sustained. It does not appear from the complaint that any relation of especial trust or confidence existed between the parties to the contract, or that the means of knowledge as to the terms and, conditions of the writing were not equally open and accessible to both. The care and diligence of a prudent man in the transaction of his business would demand an examination of the instrument before signing, either by himself or by some one for him in whom he had a right to place confidence.
The fact that the plaintiff was illiterate, and could read manuscript only with difficulty, did not render this precaution less necessary.
Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.