Case law

People v. Richardson

43 Cal. 4th 959 · California Supreme Court · May 22, 2008

Marshall in the future,” as well as told the jury that Marshall had not been offered immunity. … At Brown’s trial, Marshall testified on direct examination that he had been offered immunity “to charges other than murder” if he told police what had happened at the Holley residence, but had not been “granted immunity in

Sears v. Rule

27 Cal. 2d 131 · California Supreme Court · Nov 1, 1945

Defendant qualified as executor and proceeded to administer the estate. … No language could more clearly indicate that Charles was not to become the sole beneficiary or distributee of the entire estate.”

Higgins v. L.A. Gas & Electric Co.

159 Cal. 651 · California Supreme Court · Apr 7, 1911

The gun was offered by the defendant to establish his contention in this regard. … Eebman qualified as an expert of twenty-two years’ experience as a contractor and builder.

Dodds v. Commission on Judicial Performance

12 Cal. 4th 163 · California Supreme Court · Dec 21, 1995

Nearly all of these declarants qualify their praise of petitioner, using such words as "tough," "short," "abrupt," "direct," "rude," "impatient," and "gruff." … There is no dispute that the Constitution immunizes a judge for certain past misconduct when the voters have more recently elected him to a new term.

McClatchy Newspapers v. Superior Court

44 Cal. 3d 1162 · California Supreme Court · Apr 18, 1988

permitted two witnesses who had testified before the grand jury to intervene in support of the court’s order: an unnamed Fresno County employee (hereafter referred to as Doe), and John Rust, an SCT executive who was granted immunity … The importance of secrecy is well established in the context of the grand jury’s criminal indictment function.

People v. Kelly

51 Cal. 3d 931 · California Supreme Court · Nov 26, 1990

Honeycutt, supra, 20 Cal.3d 150 , on which defendant relies, is clearly distinguishable. … As will appear, however, defendant’s statement clearly qualifies as a confession and we shall treat it as such. (See People v.

Mallon v. City of Long Beach

44 Cal. 2d 199 · California Supreme Court · Apr 5, 1955

It was clearly recognized in that case that the city’s title in fee simple was subject to the public trust ( 11 Cal.2d at 613 ; and see City of Long Beach v. … A municipal corporation has no privileges or immunities under the United States Constitution that it can invoke against the will of the state (Williams v.

Bianco v. Industrial Accident Commission

24 Cal. 2d 584 · California Supreme Court · Jul 25, 1944

The foregoing section establishes a limitation of time and does not extinguish the right: "The running of the period of limitations prescribed by this chapter is an affirmative defense and operates to bar the remedy and not … The phrasing is permissive and affirmative which clearly indicates that the applicant is to have the longer period rather than being restricted to a shorter one.

Sharon v. Sharon

75 Cal. 1 · California Supreme Court · Jan 31, 1888

Here then, it is clearly, and beyond all controversy, provided, deliberately and expressly, that consent alone is not sufficient. … It argued that but little meaning can be attached to the language of the code because the word “open” is not used to qualify the word “assumption.”

People v. Catlin

109 Cal. Rptr. 2d 31 · California Supreme Court · Sep 26, 2001

As we shall explain, this contention clearly lacks merit. … Ford was qualified to give opinion testimony of a medical nature. 12.

Cucinella v. Weston Biscuit Co.

42 Cal. 2d 71 · California Supreme Court · Jan 12, 1954

Other evidence established that morning traffic on San Fernando is “heavy” during the period from 8 to 10 o’clock. … The speed of any vehicle upon a highway not in excess of the limits specified in this section or established as authorized in this code is lawful unless clearly proved to be in violation of the basic rule declared in Section

Bowland v. Municipal Court

18 Cal. 3d 479 · California Supreme Court · Dec 6, 1976

Complications of pregnancy that require the kind of procedures authorized only under section 2137 unquestionably do qualify as “sicknesses” or “afflictions.” … in the healing arts, but whose qualifications have not been established by the receipt of an appropriate certificate.

Hersh v. Garau

218 Cal. 460 · California Supreme Court · Jun 30, 1933

He had also appraised property for the First National Bank of Culver City, and was apparently well qualified to give his opinion as to the value of the real estate. Mr. … This clearly indicates that appellants did not entertain an honest belief that the option had been previously revoked.

Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. Superior Court

17 Cal. 3d 259 · California Supreme Court · Apr 27, 1976

Nor has BART established that Flxible is the alter ego of Rohr. … Even the purchases fail to establish a close association with the community.

People v. Eroshevich

60 Cal. 4th 583 · California Supreme Court · Nov 3, 2014

After reviewing all the evidence, “in a light most favorable to upholding the verdict,” the trial court found the evidence to be “clearly insufficient.” … First, “society would pay too high a price „were every accused granted immunity from punishment because of any defect sufficient to constitute reversible error in the proceedings leading to conviction.‟ [Citation.]”

Club Members for an Honest Election v. Sierra Club

45 Cal. 4th 309 · California Supreme Court · Dec 15, 2008

If a defendant meets this threshold showing, the plaintiff must establish “a probability that the plaintiff will prevail on the claimfs].” (Ibid.) … To qualify under section 425.17(b)’s exception, suits must be brought solely to secure this public benefit.

Southern Pacific Co. v. Railroad Commission

13 Cal. 2d 89 · California Supreme Court · Mar 3, 1939

In other words, when the fact has been clearly established that by practical, efficient and satisfactory methods a financially reliable common carrier is not only ready, willing and able to lower the prevailing rate for freight … It follows that in whatever light the “finding” that the proposed rate was “unreasonably low” be viewed, it clearly was not supported by the evidence, but was contrary to it.

Ellis v. Tone

58 Cal. 289 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1881

The vice of the instruction is that the right to use the water is qualified by the reasonable manner of its use, and not by any reasonableness in respect to the quantity used.” … Further, in our opinion, the plaintiffs were entitled to recover if there was a diversion, which seems to have been clearly shown.

People v. Murtishaw

29 Cal. 3d 733 · California Supreme Court · Jul 27, 1981

We explain that the evidence is clearly adequate to show a deliberate and premeditated killing. … Applying the test of prejudice established in People v.

People v. Bower

24 Cal. 3d 638 · California Supreme Court · Jul 17, 1979

Moreover, since the officer’s call to appellant to stop and to turn around clearly “restrain[ed] his freedom to walk away,” the test of Terry v. Ohio was met. … Clearly, thai is not the situation.