Case law

People v. Hovarter

44 Cal. 4th 983 · California Supreme Court · Aug 11, 2008

A trial court has broad discretion in determining whether a sufficient foundation has been laid to qualify evidence as a business record. … On appeal, we will reverse a trial court’s ruling on such a foundational question only if the court clearly abused its discretion.

Murray v. State Bar

40 Cal. 3d 575 · California Supreme Court · Dec 9, 1985

State Bar (1955) 45 Cal.2d 104, 111 [ 287 P.2d 761 ]), the lack of an evil intent does not immunize the attorney's conduct from a finding of moral turpitude." ( Fitzsimmons v. … In addition, the stipulated findings clearly establish that petitioner withdrew funds from the estate account as payment for his services without prior court approval. (8) "It is well settled that an attorney may not unilaterally

Taus v. Loftus

54 Cal. Rptr. 3d 775 · California Supreme Court · Feb 26, 2007

In any event, we conclude that plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case on the defamation claim in light of a factor not raised by the parties or considered by the Court of Appeal—the qualified privilege to which … Co. (1976) 18 Cal.3d 406, 413 [ 134 Cal.Rptr. 402 , 556 P.2d 764 ]: “ ‘The malice necessary to defeat a qualified privilege is “actual malice” which is established by a showing that the publication was motivated by hatred

Livingston v. Robinson

10 Cal. 2d 730 · California Supreme Court · Feb 24, 1938

Baldwin, supra, that he is not bound by all the terms and conditions clearly and specifically incorporated in those bonds. … The legality of the refunding bonds issued under the 1931 plan having been established in the case of Mulcahy v.

Farmers Insurance Exchange v. Superior Court

2 Cal. 4th 377 · California Supreme Court · Apr 6, 1992

We conclude that in the absence of legislation clearly addressing whether a court may exercise discretion under the primary jurisdiction doctrine, a court may exercise such discretion and may decline to hear a suit until … The complaint filed in superior court makes no mention of any alleged improper referral plan between Farmers and Mid-Century, and, although it was clearly possible for the People to do so, 17 the complaint does not on its

People v. R.V.

61 Cal. 4th 181 · California Supreme Court · May 18, 2015

Specifically, he found that minor was both “clearly suffering from depression” and that minor’s thinking and cognitive functioning was “clearly disrupted.” Dr. … On the record presented in this case, the court’s rejection of the expert’s opinion was made in the absence of disagreement among qualified experts.

Metropolitan Water District v. Superior Court

9 Cal. Rptr. 3d 857 · California Supreme Court · Feb 26, 2004

Finally, employees of contracting agencies may not decline membership for which they qualify: “Membership in this system is compulsory for all employees included under a contract.” (Ibid.) … Though the precodification version of the law contained provisions regarding state agencies and contracting cities in the same paragraph, indeed the same sentence, that text, like the two subdivisions today, nonetheless clearly

Van Vleck v. Board of Dental Examiners

5 Cal. Unrep. 636 · California Supreme Court · Mar 29, 1897

In that case the board of education had examined Keller for a teacher’s certificate, and, as alleged in the petition, had found that he was in all respects qualified, and in every way fit and competent, to receive a certificate … But, since the board cannot be compelled to decide the question that way, although the evidence might clearly sustain it in so doing, there is no ground for mandamus.”

People v. Villatoro

54 Cal. 4th 1152 · California Supreme Court · Jul 30, 2012

As noted, section 1101, subdivision (b), permits the admission of other crimes evidence to establish a material fact like intent, common design or plan, or identity. (See ante, at p. 1159.) … Instead, the instruction clearly told the jury that all offenses must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, even those used to draw an inference of propensity.

Hildebrand v. State Bar

36 Cal. 2d 504 · California Supreme Court · Dec 20, 1950

It is our conclusion that the [attorney's] unprofessional conduct as indicated has been clearly established, and invites the censure of the court, which is hereby recorded." … "The testimony demonstrates very clearly the evils of the system of ambulance chasing.

Carlin v. Superior Court

13 Cal. 4th 1104 · California Supreme Court · Aug 30, 1996

Wyeth Laboratories, Inc., supra, 399 F.2d at p. 131 [exception where prescription drug “was not dispensed as such,” but administered in mass immunization program].) … We did not, as Upjohn erroneously contends, thereby establish that the standard for failure to warn is simple negligence.

In Re Marriage of Bouquet

16 Cal. 3d 583 · California Supreme Court · Mar 19, 1976

Addison involved a factual pattern almost identical to that of the present case; it conclusively establishes the constitutionality of applying amended section 5118 retroactively. … When the word is so defined, the statement that vested rights are immune to retroactive legislation becomes a tautology, not a proposition. (See Loop v.

Pohl v. Mills

218 Cal. 641 · California Supreme Court · Aug 1, 1933

Thereafter the partners commenced to establish a chain system of these booths throughout the state of California. … to a matter, if he undertakes to do so either voluntarily or in response to inquiry, he is bound not only to state truly what he tells but also not to suppress or conceal any facts within his knowledge which materially qualify

Mileikowsky v. West Hills Hospital & Medical Center

45 Cal. 4th 1259 · California Supreme Court · Apr 6, 2009

Peer review that is not conducted fairly and results in the unwarranted loss of a qualified physician’s right or privilege to use a hospital’s facilities deprives the physician of a property interest directly connected to … Read in context, the provision for imposing safeguards clearly seems directed to the situation in which the material a physician requests to inspect or copy includes confidential information related to physicians who are

City and County of S.F. v. The Regents of the University of Cal.

California Supreme Court · Jun 20, 2019

The Constitution itself establishes the University of California, vesting the Regents with “full powers of organization and government” (Cal. Const., art. IX, § 9, subd. … Principles of governmental tax immunity do not bar the parking tax.

Harman v. City and County of San Francisco

7 Cal. 3d 150 · California Supreme Court · May 15, 1972

An examination of established appraisal doctrine will illustrate its fallacy. … In some cases, ‘highest and best use’ has been qualified to mean the ‘most likely use’ over a period of years.”

Howell v. Budd

91 Cal. 342 · California Supreme Court · Sep 22, 1891

Rep. 192 , the application to respondent for a transfer of the cause was clearly insufficient; yet we understand respondent, being desirous of an adjudication of the cause upon its merits, to have waived his objection to … discussion here, the supreme court of the United States, after an exhaustive reAÚeAV of the English authorities upon the question, said: “ It may therefore, as the result of these authorities, be safely assumed to be the established

In Re Newbern

53 Cal. 2d 786 · California Supreme Court · Mar 8, 1960

be made for the establishment of a technical meaning. … From none of the foregoing may any assistance be derived. *796 make a person such is not very clearly defined.

County of San Diego v. State

15 Cal. 4th 68 · California Supreme Court · Mar 3, 1997

criteria were established by boards of supervisors” pursuant to section 17001. … Our discussion establishes, however, that the obligation extended at least that far.

County of Mariposa v. Merced Irrigation District

32 Cal. 2d 467 · California Supreme Court · Aug 30, 1948

Certainly there does not have to be more than one owner under that section to qualify for an inclusion petition. … a right of action against it, unless the intent to bind it thereby otherwise clearly appears.”