## Facts

- Donald W. Odorizzi was a permanent elementary school teacher employed by a school district under contract to continue teaching the next year.
- He was arrested on criminal charges and underwent arrest, police questioning, booking, and release on bail after extended sleeplessness and emotional strain.
- Shortly after his release, the district superintendent and principal went to his apartment and urged him to resign immediately.
- Odorizzi alleged they said there was no time to consult an attorney and that refusal to resign would lead to suspension and dismissal proceedings with publicity about his arrest.
- He alleged they represented that an immediate resignation would avoid publicity and preserve his chances of obtaining other teaching employment.
- Odorizzi signed a written resignation; the district accepted it shortly thereafter.
- The criminal charges were later dismissed; Odorizzi sought reinstatement, which the district refused.
- Odorizzi sued seeking relief to invalidate or rescind the resignation, alleging duress, menace, fraud (actual and constructive), mistake, undue influence, and lack of capacity.

## Issues

1. Whether the complaint stated facts sufficient to rescind Odorizzi’s resignation on grounds of duress, menace, fraud (actual or constructive), mistake, or incapacity.
2. Whether the complaint stated facts sufficient to rescind the resignation on the ground of undue influence under California Civil Code §§ 1567 and 1575.

## Decision

- The court affirmed dismissal as to rescission theories based on duress, menace, actual fraud, constructive fraud, mistake, and incapacity.
- The court reversed dismissal as to undue influence, holding the complaint pleaded sufficient facts to state a cause of action for rescission on that theory.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings limited to the undue influence claim.

## Legal Principles

- Duress requires an unlawful threat; a threat to pursue lawful administrative or legal action within the actor’s authority does not constitute duress.
- Actual fraud requires pleaded facts showing misrepresentation and related elements; conclusory allegations are insufficient.
- Constructive fraud generally requires a fiduciary or confidential relationship; an ordinary employer-employee relationship, without more, is insufficient.
- Allegations of fatigue and emotional distress, without facts establishing a legally recognized incapacity, do not alone establish incapacity or mistake warranting rescission.
- Undue influence may be shown where excessive pressure is applied to a party in a significantly weakened mental or emotional condition, resulting in the dominating party effectively substituting its will for the other’s.
- Factors supporting undue influence in a transaction may include: an unusual time or place, insistence on immediate action, strong emphasis on consequences of delay, multiple persuaders against a single party, isolation from advisers, and statements that there is no time to consult counsel.

## Conclusion

The court held that a teacher’s resignation obtained immediately after an arrest, under alleged high-pressure tactics and denial of time to consult counsel, could support rescission for undue influence, while threats of lawful disciplinary proceedings and the pleaded fraud, mistake, and incapacity theories were insufficient on demurrer.


Odorizzi v. Bloomfield Sch. Dist., 246 Cal. App. 2d 123 (Cal. Ct. App. 1966)