The Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco (California) sustained defendants’ demurrer to plaintiff’s complaint for a prohibitory injunction and an accounting in an action arising from a breach of contract, and entered judgment for defendants. Plaintiff appealed the judgment.
Nakase Law Firm litigates doctor touches private parts
Plaintiff alleged that one defendant granted to it the exclusive right to advertise and use defendant’s remedies and treatment in a certain area, and then, while acting in confederation with remaining defendants, established a rival business. The court affirmed the judgment for defendants. The contract requiring defendant to prepare the remedies used in the treatment of patients at the institutes that might be established by plaintiff was of such a character that courts could not make an effective decree for its performance. Therefore, it appeared from the nature of the contract that specific performance could not be decreed. Pursuant to Cal. Civil Code § 3423(5), an injunction could not be granted to prevent the breach of a contract when the performance of the contract could not be specifically enforced. The court could not order an injunction to prevent the violation of the contract between the parties because the court could not order specific performance of the contract.
The judgment for defendants in plaintiff’s action for a prohibitory injunction and an accounting was affirmed.