## Facts

- The Los Angeles Turf Club, Inc. operated Santa Anita Park, a race course open to the public upon purchase of admission tickets.
- Morris Orloff alleged that in January 1946 he purchased a ticket, was admitted, and was then ejected by the club and its employees without cause.
- Orloff alleged that in February 1946 he again purchased a ticket, was admitted, and was again ejected without cause.
- Orloff alleged he was over 21, of good moral character, and had behaved properly, and that the ejections caused humiliation, embarrassment, and mental anguish.
- Orloff further alleged defendants ordered him not to return and threatened to refuse him admission in the future or to remove him if he entered.
- Orloff sought only injunctive relief requiring future admission and prohibiting exclusion except on lawful grounds.
- Orloff relied on California Civil Code §§ 51–54, including § 53, which made it unlawful for a race course to refuse admission to a qualified adult presenting or tendering the price of a ticket, subject to specified exceptions.

## Issues

1. Whether the statutory damages remedies for unlawful exclusion from a race course under Civil Code §§ 52 and 54 are exclusive, thereby precluding injunctive relief.
2. Whether a plaintiff alleging an ongoing and threatened future violation of the statutory right of admission under Civil Code § 53 may seek an injunction when damages are inadequate.

## Decision

- The California Supreme Court reversed the judgment of dismissal entered after the trial court sustained defendants’ demurrer.
- The Court held the statutory damages remedy did not preclude equitable relief.
- The Court ruled that injunctive relief may be available to enforce the statutory right of admission where equitable requirements are met, including continuing or threatened violations and inadequacy of damages.
- The matter was remanded for further proceedings on the merits.

## Legal Principles

- A statute creating a right of admission to places of public amusement, including race courses, establishes a substantive right that may be enforced in equity as well as at law.
- An express statutory damages remedy will not be treated as exclusive absent clear legislative language making it exclusive.
- Injunctive relief may be appropriate when a legal remedy is inadequate, including where harms such as humiliation and repeated exclusion are difficult to measure and where future violations are threatened.
- Remedial civil rights and public accommodations statutes are construed liberally to effect their purpose and to provide effective enforcement of the protected right.

## Conclusion

The court held that the statutory damages provisions for unlawful exclusion from a race course do not bar injunctive relief, and that a patron alleging ongoing and threatened future exclusion in violation of the statutory right of admission may pursue an injunction when damages are inadequate.


Orloff v. Los Angeles Turf Club, Inc., 30 Cal. 2d 110 (Cal. 1947)