Hudson v. Craft
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Full case nameGuy C. Hudson, a Minor, etc., et al., Appellants, v. Orville Craft, et al., Respondents.
Citation(s)33 Cal.2d 654; 204 P.2d 1
Chief JusticePhil S. Gibson
Associate JusticesJohn W. Shenk, Douglas L. Edmonds, Jesse W. Carter, Roger J. Traynor, B. Rey Schauer, Homer R. Spence
| Hudson v. Craft | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Decided March 22, 1949 | |
| Full case name | Guy C. Hudson, a Minor, etc., et al., Appellants, v. Orville Craft, et al., Respondents. |
| Citation(s) | 33 Cal.2d 654; 204 P.2d 1 |
| Holding | |
| It is not possible for an individual to consent to an unlawful act or deliberate harm. Judgement reversed. | |
| Court membership | |
| Chief Justice | Phil S. Gibson |
| Associate Justices | John W. Shenk, Douglas L. Edmonds, Jesse W. Carter, Roger J. Traynor, B. Rey Schauer, Homer R. Spence |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Carter, joined by Gibson, Shenk, Traynor, Schauer, Spence |
| Concurrence | Edmonds |
Hudson v. Craft (33 Cal.2d 654, 1949) is a United States court case defining how the court defines consent as a defense to an intentional harm.[1]
The Defendants were conducting a carnival where one of the concessions was a boxing exhibition, which was conducted in violation of statutory provisions, distributed prizes and prize money to the contestants, and no license had been issued.[2] The Plaintiff engaged in a boxing match after being solicited by the Defendants and thereby consented to the contest.
