Case law

Brothers v. Agric. Labor Relations Bd.

224 Cal. Rptr. 3d 413 · California Supreme Court · Oct 25, 2017

The petition for review by respondent Agricultural Labor Relations Board is granted. Further action in this matter is deferred pending consideration and disposition of a related issue in Tri-Fanucchi Farms v. … Agricultural Labor Relations Board, S227270 (see Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.512 (d)(2) ), or pending further order of the court.

Dalton v. Bd. of Water Comm'rs of Azusa Twp.

49 Cal. 222 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1874

The Board of Water Commissioners of Azusa township filed a supplemental petition, for the purpose of continuing in its name, the proceedings which had been instituted by the Board of Water Commissioners of San José township … It *224 does not appear that a petition was presented to the Board of Water Commissioners of Azusa township, signed by a majority of persons liable to work on water ditches in that township.

Baker v. Eilers Music Co.

175 Cal. 657 · California Supreme Court · Jul 31, 1917

Superior Court, 65 Cal. 570 , [ 4 Pac. 577 ], and Brown v. Campbell, 100 Cal. 635 , [ 38 Am. St. Rep. 314 , 35 Pac. 433 ].” So, too, in Greer v. … Further, it was contended by the auditor that the board of supervisors had revoked the order of appoint *660 ment of the assistant district attorney.

El-Attar v. Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center

56 Cal. 4th 976 · California Supreme Court · Jun 6, 2013

In Pinkser v. … Haas v.

California Teachers Ass'n v. San Diego Community College District

28 Cal. 3d 692 · California Supreme Court · Jan 19, 1981

(Campbell v. Board of Dental Examiners, 53 Cal.App.3d 283 [ 125 Cal.Rptr. 694 ]; Friends of Mammoth v. Board of Supervisors, 8 Cal.3d 247 [ 104 Cal.Rptr. 761 , 502 P.2d 1049 ].)” … Anderson (1971) 4 Cal.3d 873, 881 [ 95 Cal.Rptr. 1 , 484 P.2d 1345 , 42 A.L.R.3d 1392 ] (accord); and see Silver v. Brown (1966) 63 Cal.2d 841, 846 [ 48 Cal.Rptr. 609 , 409 P.2d 689 ]; Carmona v.

James v. Marinship Corp.

25 Cal. 2d 721 · California Supreme Court · Dec 30, 1944

Halpern, 313 Mass. 385 [ 48 N.E.2d 1 ] ; Retail Clerks’ Union v. Wisconsin Emp. Rel. Board, 242 Wis. 21 [ 6 N.W.2d 698 ]; Wisconsin E. R. Bd. v. Milk & Ice Cream D. & D. E. … Assembly No. 7507, K. of L., 77 Md. 396 [ 26 A. 505 , 39 Am.St.Rep. 421 , 19 L.R.A. 408 ] ; Wills v. Local No. 106, 26 Ohio N.P.N.S. 435 ; Shinsky v. O’Neil, 232 Mass. 99 [ 121 N.E. 790, 792 ] ; Brown v.

In Re Sutter-Butte By-Pass Assessment No. 6

191 Cal. 650 · California Supreme Court · Aug 22, 1923

Co. v. Van Camp, 2 Idaho, 40 [3 Pac. 22]; Fulkerson v. Stevens, 31 Kan. 125 [ 1 Pac. 261 ]; Olympia Waterworks v. Board of Equalization, 14 Wash. 268 [ 44 Pac. 267 ]; Lawry v. … Rep. 404]); Davidson v. Administrators of New Orleans, 96 U. S. 97 [ 24 L. Ed. 616 ]; Fallbrook Irr. Dist. v. Bradley, 164 U. S. 112 [ 41 L. Ed. 369 , 17 Sup. Ct. Rep. 56, see, also, Rose’s U. S. Notes]; Brown v.

Farmers Insurance Exchange v. Cocking

29 Cal. 3d 383 · California Supreme Court · May 21, 1981

(Cooper v. Bray, supra, 21 Cal.3d 841, 847 ; Newland v. Board of Governors (1977) 19 Cal.3d 705, 711 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 620 , 566 P.2d 254 ].) … As we stressed in Brown v.

Domar Electric, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles

9 Cal. 4th 161 · California Supreme Court · Dec 28, 1994

(City and County of San Francisco v. Cooper (1975) 13 Cal.3d 898, 923-924 [ 120 Cal.Rptr. 707 , 534 P.2d 403 ]; Currieri v. City of Roseville (1970) 4 Cal.App.3d 997, 1001 [ 84 Cal.Rptr. 615 ]; Brown v. … Under these circumstances, the Board’s action is entitled to deference. (See Social Services Union v.

People v. Tacardon

302 Cal. Rptr. 3d 374 · California Supreme Court · Dec 29, 2022

(People v. Brown (2015) 61 Cal.4th 968, 974 (Brown).) So merely walking up to someone in a parked car is not a detention. … (Brown, supra, 61 Cal.4th at p. 984, quoting United States v.

Malone v. Superior Court

40 Cal. 2d 546 · California Supreme Court · Mar 17, 1953

The dispute involves the test as to the sufficiency of the general outline of the facts expected to be proved, whether it must show an actual or potential cause or right of action (see Brown v. … It thus is not important whether we treat the committee as analogous to an unincorporated association or as a public board the members of which are public officers. (As to the latter, see discussion in Stout v.

People v. Wilson

11 Cal. 5th 259 · California Supreme Court · Apr 12, 2021

The reliability of Brown’s identification was not undermined. (See People v. … The prosecution understood Brown took the threat seriously. Brown told prosecutors he would testify if he was 34  PEOPLE v.

Pacific Vegetable Oil Corp. v. C.S.T., Ltd.

29 Cal. 2d 228 · California Supreme Court · Nov 12, 1946

As early as Manson v. … (Everett v. Brown, 120 Misc. 349 [ 198 N.Y.S. 462 , 465].) The record shows that the arbitrators investigated and examined the original documents relied on by the parties.

Farrell v. County of Placer

23 Cal. 2d 624 · California Supreme Court · Jan 31, 1944

(City of Los Angeles v. Cohn, 101 Cal. 373 [ 35 P. 1002 ]; Fresno v. Fresno C. & I. Co., 98 Cal. 179 [ 32 P. 943 ]; Sacramento v. Clunie, 120 Cal. 29 [ 52 P. 44 ]; Brown v. … In the Kline case all that appears is that a letter in regard to the claim was sent to the board of trustees of the school district and some action, the character of which does not appear, was taken thereon by the board.

San Diego Teachers Assn. v. Superior Court

24 Cal. 3d 1 · California Supreme Court · Apr 10, 1979

(Placentia Fire Fighters v. City of Placentia (1976) 57 Cal.App.3d 9, 25 [ 129 Cal.Rptr. 126 ] (construing Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, § 3505).) … (Labor Board v. Insurance Agents (1960) 361 U.S. 477, 489 [ 4 L.Ed.2d 454, 464 , 80 S.Ct. 419 ]; cf. Lamphere Sch. Dist. v.

Abeel v. Clark

84 Cal. 226 · California Supreme Court · May 31, 1890

(Kurtz v. People, 33 Mich. 282 ; Boyd v. State, 53 Ala. 605 ; Hannibal v. Marion, 69 Mo. 575 ; Robinson v. Skipworth, 23 Ind. 317 ; Comm’rs of Marion v. Comm’rs of Harvey, 26 Kan. 197 ; Howell v. … (See Stone v. Brown, 54 Tex. 342 ; Breen v. Railroad Co., 44 Tex. 305 ; State v. Ranson, 73 Mo. 86 ; In re Public Parks, 86 N. Y. 439 , 440; Larned v. Tiernan, 110 Ill. 177 ; Mills v. Charlton, 29 Wis. 410 ; 9 *229 Am.

Western States Petroleum etc. v. State Bd. of Equalization

57 Cal. 4th 401 · California Supreme Court · Aug 5, 2013

(See State Bd. of Equalization v. … The Board has no power to determine tax rates or to extend the scope of a tax to items previously untaxed. (Cf. AB Cellular LA, LLC v.

People v. Hopson

219 Cal. Rptr. 3d 717 · California Supreme Court · Jul 3, 2017

Zapien (1993) 4 Cal.4th 929, 976, quoting D’Amico v. Board of Medical Examiners (1974) 11 Cal. 3d 1, 19; see also People v. Smithey (1999) 20 Cal.4th 936, 972.) … Anderson (1980) 447 U.S. 231, 238, quoting Brown v. United States (1958) 356 U.S. 148, 156.)

California Grocers Assn. v. City of Los Angeles

52 Cal. 4th 177 · California Supreme Court · Jul 18, 2011

Brown, supra, 554 U.S. at p. 65 , quoting Machinists, supra, 427 U.S. at p. 140, fn. 4.) … (See Labor Board v. Jones & Laughlin, supra, 301 U.S. at pp. 43-46 [rejecting liberty of contract challenge to the NLRA]; Lincoln Union v.

Miller v. McKinnon

20 Cal. 2d 83 · California Supreme Court · Apr 2, 1942

App. 462 [ 286 Pac. 173 ]; Brown v. Bozeman, 138 Cal. App. 133 [ 32 P. (2d) 168 ]; Henry Cowell Lime & Cement Co. v. Williams, 182 Cal. 691 [ 189 Pac. 838 ].) … App. 676 [ 170 Pac. 860 ]; Burr *96 v. Board of Supervisors, 96 Cal. 210 [ 31 Pac. 38 ]; Hansen v. Carr, 73 Cal. App. 511 [ 238 Pac. 1048 ]; County of Shasta v. Moody, supra; County of Marin v. Messner, 44 Cal.