Case law

Agricultural Labor Relations Board v. Superior Court

16 Cal. 3d 392 · California Supreme Court · Mar 4, 1976

In Clean Air the “fundamental policy determination” by the agency was to totally reverse a clearly established legislative priority of pollution-free air—and environmental protection generally—over concern for increased gasoline … If there is an established lunch break, the one-hour period shall include such lunch break. If there is no established lunch break, the one-hour period may be at any time during the working day. “c.

City of Ontario v. Superior Court

2 Cal. 3d 335 · California Supreme Court · Apr 2, 1970

restriction is placed on the agency itself, which is in effect authorized by section 869 to disregard the 60-day statute of limitations imposed by section 860. 1 The practical consequence of this statutory scheme should be clearly … indirectly but effectively “validate” its action by doing nothing to validate it; unless an “interested person” brings an action of his own under section 863 within the 60-day period, the agency’s action *342 will become immune

Adcock v. Board of Education

10 Cal. 3d 60 · California Supreme Court · Sep 13, 1973

The court held that even though he could have been assigned to any teaching duty for which he was qualified and for which he was needed (Ed. Code, §§ 931, 939, subd. … The record clearly sustains the findings of the trial court. The judgment is affirmed.

Cole v. Fair Oaks Fire Protection District

43 Cal. 3d 148 · California Supreme Court · Jan 2, 1987

“It is an established canon of interpretation that statutes are not to be given a retrospective operation unless it is clearly made to appear that such was the legislative intent.” (Aetna Cas. & Surety Co. v. Ind. Acc. … That system balances the advantage to the employer of immunity from liability at law against the detriment of relatively swift and certain compensation payments.

Blair v. Pitchess

5 Cal. 3d 258 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1971

After proper identification of the property, it is taken from the premises by a professional mover or other qualified person. … Nevertheless, that case is clearly' distinguishable.

Benson v. City of Los Angeles

60 Cal. 2d 355 · California Supreme Court · Aug 27, 1963

The claims were denied in both instances, the city maintaining that it was obligated to neither claimant for a pension as neither was qualified under the charter provisions. … Clearly the detriment caused by the wrongful withholding of past due pension payments falls within the definition of damages, and as clearly the past due payments represent obligations on which interest will run.

Curran v. Mount Diablo Council of Boy Scouts of America

17 Cal. 4th 670 · California Supreme Court · Mar 23, 1998

Indeed, hospitals are often nonprofit organizations, and they are clearly business establishments to the extent that they employ a vast array of persons, care for an extensive physical plant and charge substantial fees to … In our view, however, the circumstances in Warfield are clearly distinguishable from those presented in this case.

Waite v. Waite

6 Cal. 3d 461 · California Supreme Court · Jan 14, 1972

Florida residents filed suit in Florida to' establish their right to certain intangible property held by a trust established and administered in Delaware. … In Benson the court clearly differentiates August’s vested pension rights upon retirement from his ‘widow’s’ contingent rights.

People v. Fudge

7 Cal. 4th 1075 · California Supreme Court · Jun 30, 1994

Lack of Foundation The proposed evidence was clearly relevant, as discussed below. … Defendant first contends Detective Nunez was not qualified to testify as an expert.

People v. Brown

3 Cal. Rptr. 3d 145 · California Supreme Court · Oct 29, 2003

The prosecutor’s argument, while forceful, did not clearly appeal to the jurors’ passions and prejudices. … A defendant’s reiterated denial of guilt and the principal facts that purportedly establish it does not justify the prosecution’s introduction of new evidence to establish that which defendant would clearly have denied from

Crocker-Citizens National Bank v. Younger

4 Cal. 3d 202 · California Supreme Court · Feb 26, 1971

The trust which has given rise to this litigation was established in 1950 by Thomas P. Eckstrom, Sr., (trustor) as a revocable inter vivos trust. … The trial court was clearly correct; the trust documents nowhere provide compensation for “services” such as this internecine litigation among those entrusted with the management of the trust.

Kaanaana v. Barrett Business Services, Inc.

California Supreme Court · Mar 29, 2021

First, the other two public works definitions clearly referred to the specific kinds of work included: “[c]onstruction . . . or repair work” and “[s]treet, sewer or other improvement work.” (§ 1720, former subds. … Former section 653c of the Penal Code, enacted in 1905, established an eight-hour workday for “any laborer, workman, or mechanic employed upon any of the public works of,” or “upon work done for,” the state or any political

Perkins Manufacturing Co. v. Jordan

200 Cal. 667 · California Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1927

dollars; when a part of the capital stock of any corporation has a par value and a part of such stock has no par value, the tax shall be computed upon such par value stock in accordance with the admeasurement schedule herein established … Clearly, there is no escape from this conclusion. Indeed, the case of Airway etc. Corp. v. Day, supra, seems squarely to decide these very questions.

People v. Warner

20 Cal. 3d 678 · California Supreme Court · Mar 1, 1978

In conclusion, the *685 circumstances surrounding defendant's crime clearly weighed heavily against probation. … . [2] In reaching a contrary conclusion, the majority depart from the established standard of review of a trial court's discretionary decision.

Vogel v. County of Los Angeles

68 Cal. 2d 18 · California Supreme Court · Dec 21, 1967

establishment, but the furnishing of such information would be inconsistent with and violative of the duties of such police officers. … Const.) “ ‘In viewing the constitutional mantle thrown around an individual it is important to remember that the mantle is a safeguard, not absolute, but relative and qualified.

People v. Sanders

51 Cal. 3d 471 · California Supreme Court · Sep 27, 1990

Qualified jury lists and master jury lists derived from the source lists shall be prepared so as to reasonably minimize duplication of names.” … Defendant clearly raised the issue in timely fashion and made as complete a record as possible.

California Trust Co. v. Jones

24 Cal. 2d 191 · California Supreme Court · May 1, 1944

The circumstance of his being the sole heir tends to establish that the testator intended the heirs to be ascertained as of the death of the sole heir. … Easter, do not purport to qualify the gift over of the remainder interest. Neither do the provisions for the payment of income to Ephraim’s widow during Mrs.

City of Pasadena v. Stimson

91 Cal. 238 · California Supreme Court · Sep 16, 1891

This distinction is, I think, clearly recognized in Ex parte Smith and Keating, 38 Cal. 710 , and is entirely consistent with the decision in Brooks v. … Hyde, 37 Cal. 366 , where it was held that laws must operate uniformly upon all persons standing in the same relation to the law, in respect to the privileges and immunities conferred by it, or the acts which it prohibits

People v. Dillon

199 Cal. 1 · California Supreme Court · Jun 28, 1926

Statutes which come clearly within the exercise of the police power of the state, of which section 424 is a striking example, fully illustrate the rule. (People v. … “Sections 7, 112 and 113 of the Penal Code, when read together, clearly establish the proposition that it was not necessary in making out the offense to prove any fraudulent intention on the part of the defendant.”

Bautista v. Jones

25 Cal. 2d 746 · California Supreme Court · Dec 30, 1944

However, this privilege to interfere with a competitor’s valuable and legally protected economic interests is not an absolute one, but is qualified and conditional. … Clearly the means which the statute authorizes—picketing and peac *760 eful publicity—are not prohibited by the Fourteenth Amendment. ..■. The picketing was peaceful.