Case law

Estate of Lances

216 Cal. 397 · California Supreme Court · Sep 23, 1932

(Hunt v. United Bank & Trust Co., 210 Cal. 108 [ 291 Pac. 184, 188 ].) … (Smellie v. Southern Pac. Co., 212 Cal. 540 [ 299 Pac. 529 ].)

In re Lira

58 Cal. 4th 573 · California Supreme Court · Feb 3, 2014

V, § 8, subd. (b); see § 3041.2.) … As the applicable statutes make clear, whether a period of parole is to be required and, if so, its duration and conditions are matters for the Board. (§§ 3000, 3001, subd. (b); see also People v.

Wickersham v. Crittenden

93 Cal. 17 · California Supreme Court · Jan 20, 1892

Brown, 80 N. Y. 535 ; San Diego v. San Diego etc. R. R. Co., 44 Cal. 106 ; Wilbur v. Lynde, 49 Cal. 290 ; 19 Am. Rep. 645 ; Farmers’ etc. Bank v. Downey, 53 Cal. 466 ; 31 Am. Rep. 62 .) … (Butts v. Wood, 37 N. Y. 317 ; Kelsey v. Sargent, 40 Hun, 155 ; Copeland v. Johnson M. Co., 47 Hun, 235 ; Gardner v. Butler, 30 N. J. Eq. 702; Ward v. Davidson, 89 Mo. 445 ; Chamberlain v.

Wood v. Etiwanda Water Co.

147 Cal. 228 · California Supreme Court · Jun 24, 1905

Brown’s claims as a homestead settler were subordinate to those interests and his land was subject to a servitude for the support of the same. (De Necochea v. … (Judson v. Malloy, 40 Cal. 299 ; Bell v. Bed Rock etc. Co., 36 Cal. 214 ; Moon v. Rollins, 36 Cal. 333 ; 1 S t. John v. Kidd, 26 Cal. 272 ; Richardson v. McNulty, 24 Cal. 345 ; Willson v. Cleaveland, 30 Cal. 192 .)

Butterworth v. Boyd

12 Cal. 2d 140 · California Supreme Court · Sep 2, 1938

(Whitmore v. Brown, 207 Cal. 473 [ 279 Pac. 447 ] ; Esberg v. Badaracco, 202 Cal. 110 [ 259 Pac. 730 ]; Anderson v. Board of Education, 126 Cal. App. 514 [ 15 Pac. (2d) 774 , 16 Pac. (2d) 272 ].) … (Abraham v. Sims, 2 Cal. (2d) 698 [ 42 Pac. (2d) 1029 ]; Emerson v. Board of Trustees, 23 Cal. App. (2d) 432 [ 73 Pac. (2d) 935 ]; Hodge v. Board of Education, 22 Cal. App. (2d) 341 [ 70 Pac. (2d) 1009 ].)

Frost v. City of Los Angeles

181 Cal. 22 · California Supreme Court · Aug 11, 1919

(Brown v. Rea, 150 Cal. 174 , [ 88 Pac. 713 ]; City Store v. San Jose etc. Co., 150 Cal. 279 , [ 88 Pac. 977 ]; Spring Valley W. W. v. Fifield, 136 Cal. 15 , [ 68 Pac. 108 ]; Code Civ. Proc., sec. 731 .) … In Los Angeles v. Hollywood, an ordinance prohibiting the establishing of cemeteries within the limits of a county without the permission of the board of supervisors was held void.

County of Riverside v. Superior Court

132 Cal. Rptr. 2d 713 · California Supreme Court · Apr 21, 2003

Saylor (1971) 5 Cal. 3d 685, 691 [ 97 Cal.Rptr. 1 , 488 P.2d 161 ]; accord, Pacific Legal Foundation v. Brown (1981) 29 Cal.3d 168, 180 [ 172 Cal.Rptr. 487 , 624 P.2d 1215 ].) … (Voters for Responsible Retirement v. Board of Supervisors (1994) 8 Cal.4th 765, 772 [ 35 Cal.Rptr.2d 814 , 884 P.2d 645 ].)

Wells Fargo Bank v. Superior Court

53 Cal. 3d 1082 · California Supreme Court · Jun 27, 1991

(Brown v. Kelly Broadcasting Co. (1989) 48 Cal.3d 711, 724 [ 257 Cal.Rptr. 708 , 771 P.2d 406 ].) In doing so, we turn first to the words themselves. (Ibid.) … (Brown v. Kelly Broadcasting Co., supra, 48 Cal.3d 711, 739 .) Wells Fargo implies that application of section 24 according to its terms is unduly cumbersome and inefficient in modern-day banking.

Wood v. County of Calaveras

164 Cal. 398 · California Supreme Court · Dec 26, 1912

(Chico High School Board v. Board of Supervisors, 118 Cal. 119 , [ 50 Pac. 275 ] ; Brown v. Visalia, 141 Cal. 380 , [ 74 Pac. 1042 ].) In People v. … (Hancock v. Board of Education, 140 Cal. 560 , [ 74 Pac. 44 ].)

Stone v. Brooks

35 Cal. 489 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1868

(See also Trustees of Rugby Charity v. Merryweather, 11 East, 375, n. and Wiggins v. Tallmadge, 11 Barb. 461 , and cases cited.) We think the cases of Bateman v. Bluck, and People V. … So in Wyman v.

Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley

17 Cal. 3d 129 · California Supreme Court · Jun 16, 1976

The Levy Leasing decision and Marcus Brown Co. v. … (See Hillcrest Terrace Corp. v. Brown (Em.App. 1943) 137 F.2d 663 .)

Mitchell v. Gonzales

54 Cal. 3d 1041 · California Supreme Court · Dec 9, 1991

(Vecchione v. Carlin (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 351, 359 [ 168 Cal.Rptr. 571 ]; see also Hart v. Browne (1980) 103 Cal.App.3d 947, 960-962 [ 163 Cal.Rptr. 356 ]; Fraijo v. … (Hart v. Browne, supra, 103 Cal.App.3d 947, 961 .)

Horton v. Winbigler

175 Cal. 149 · California Supreme Court · May 17, 1917

Brown of one-half of said money. … (Goldtree v. Thompson, 79 Cal. 613 , [ 22 Pac. 50 ]; Goad v. Montgomery, 119 Cal. 552 , [ 63 Am. St. Rep. 145 , 51 Pac. 681 ]; McCloud v. Hewlett, 135 Cal. 361 , [ 67 Pac. 333 ].)

San Benito County v. Southern Pacific Railroad

77 Cal. 518 · California Supreme Court · Dec 13, 1888

Co. v. State Board of Equalization, 60 Cal. 35 , Los Angeles v. Southern Pacific R. R. Co., 61 Cal. 59 , and Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific R. R. … The principles laid down by this court in McCulloch v. Maryland, supra, and Osborn v. Bank, 9 Wheat. 817 , and Brown v.

Weil v. Federal Kemper Life Assurance Co.

7 Cal. 4th 125 · California Supreme Court · Jan 31, 1994

America (N.D.Cal. 1944) 57 F.Supp. 198, 200-201 [accidental means were not present where a physician died from intentionally inhaling an amount of chloroform no greater than what he was accustomed to taking], distinguishing Brown … v.

Abel v. Reclamation District No. 2047

201 Cal. 451 · California Supreme Court · Jun 25, 1927

The central points urged by appellant, such as the validity, scope and effect of section 3455 of the Political Code as amended in 1919, as counsel for appellant points out, were involved in the case of Hershey et al. v. … Reclamation District No. 108, 200 Cal. 550 [ 254 Pac. 542 ], and Browning v. Reclamation District No. 108, 200 Cal. 799 [254 Pae. 551], and are controlled by the cases above cited.

Johnson v. City of Loma Linda

99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 316 · California Supreme Court · Aug 24, 2000

For instance, in Brown v. Superior Court (1984) 37 Cal.3d 477, 485 [ 208 Cal.Rptr. 724 , 691 P.2d 272 ], we described the FEHA as “a comprehensive scheme for combating employment discrimination.” … After the board upheld the disqualifications, the DFEH issued an accusation charging the board and the highway patrol with discrimination.

People v. Superior Court of Riverside Cnty.

219 Cal. Rptr. 3d 436 · California Supreme Court · Jun 26, 2017

The Board was not aware that Sahlolbei was profiting from Barth‘s contract. … Brown White & Newhouse, Brown White & Osborn and Kenneth P. White for Real Party in Interest. Francisco J. Silva and Long X. Do for California Medical Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Real Party in Interest.

Dix v. Superior Court

53 Cal. 3d 442 · California Supreme Court · Apr 18, 1991

The court, Judge Brown presiding, immediately sentenced Bradley to state prison. … (People v. Wallace (1985) 169 Cal.App.3d 406, 410 [ 215 Cal.Rptr. 203 ]; Hicks v. Board of Supervisors (1977) 69 Cal.App.3d 228, 240-241 [ 138 Cal.Rptr. 101 ]; Taliaferro v.

In re Procedures for Considering Requests for Recommendations Concerning Applications for Pardon Or Commutation

233 Cal. Rptr. 3d 129 · California Supreme Court · Mar 28, 2018

In a small number of states, the Governor shares this power with a multimember pardon board whose members include high court justices. (See *131 Minn. Const., art. V, § 7 ; Nev. Const., art. V, § 14.) … (Pat) Brown pardoned Billings.