Case law

Asdourian v. Araj

38 Cal. 3d 276 · California Supreme Court · Mar 11, 1985

by the board, and he passed the required examination. … (See Roy Brothers Drilling *287 Co. v. Jones (1981) 123 Cal.App.3d 175 [ 176 Cal.Rptr. 449 ]; Brown v. Solano County Business Development, Inc. (1979) 92 Cal.App.3d 192 [ 154 Cal.Rptr. 700 ]; Weeks v.

Riley v. Thompson

193 Cal. 773 · California Supreme Court · Jun 10, 1924

Riley, 192 Cal. 54 [ 218 Pac. 415 ]; Keiser v. State Board of Control, 192 Cal. 129 [ 218 Pac. 1016 ]; Jamme v. Riley, 192 Cal. 125 [ 218 Pac. 578 ] ; Western Shore Lumber Co. v. … Riley, 192 Cal. 144 [ 218 Pac. 761 ]; Board of Osteopathic Examiners v. Riley, 192 Cal. 158 [ 218 Pac. 1018 ]; Riley v. Forbes, supra). It was held in Railroad Com. v.

Galland v. City of Clovis

24 Cal. 1003 · California Supreme Court · Feb 5, 2001

(See, e.g., McDaniel v. Board of Education (1996) 44 Cal.App.4th 1618, 1622 [ 52 Cal.Rptr.2d 448 ]; Hall v. City of Dothan (Ala.Civ.App. 1988) 539 So.2d 286, 290 ; Diedrich v. … For the many reasons cited by Justice Brown in her dissent, post, “the Kavanau adjustment” cannot supplant section 1983.

Maguire v. Hibernia Savings & Loan Society

23 Cal. 2d 719 · California Supreme Court · Feb 29, 1944

(Dillon v. Board of Pension Commrs., 18 Cal.2d 427, 430 [ 116 P.2d 37 , 136 A.L.R. 800 ]; Osborn v. Hopkins, 160 Cal. 501, 506 [ 117 P. 519 , Ann.Cas. 1913A 413].) … (Brown v. County of Buena Vista, 95 U.S. 157 [ 24 L.Ed. 422 ]; Badger v. Badger, 2 Wall. ( 69 U.S. 94 ) 87 [ 17 L.Ed. 836 ].) Similarly, the opinions in Garrity v.

Ellig v. Naglee & Sharp

9 Cal. 683 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1858

(Garrett v. Noble, 6 Simons, 516; Taylor v. Benham, 5 Haw., 285 : Thompson v. Brown, 4 John. Ch. R., 629.) … (Garrett v. Noble— before cited; 2 Story’s E. J., § 1284; Adams’ Eq., 62; Trafford v. Boehm, 3 Atk., 444.)

Estate of Lindquist

25 Cal. 2d 697 · California Supreme Court · Dec 30, 1944

Pension Board, 75 Cal.App. 335 [ 242 P. 756 ]; Klench v. Board of Pension Fd. Commrs., 79 Cal.App. 171 [ 249 P. 46 ]; Jordan v. … Smith v. Board of Commissioners, 132 Kan. 233 [ 294 P. 915 ] (certiorari denied, 283 U.S. 855 [ 51 S.Ct. 648 , 75 L.Ed. 1462 ]).)

Banta v. Siller

121 Cal. 414 · California Supreme Court · Jul 13, 1898

(Buell v. Emerich, 85 Cal. 116 ; Wolff v. Canadian Pacific Ry. Co., 89 Cal. 332 ; Grady v. Donahoo, 108 Cal. 211 ; Harbaugh v. Honey Lake etc. Co., 109 Cal. 70 .) … (See, also, Billings v. Drew, 32 Cal. 565 ; Botto v. Vandament, 67 Cal. 332 ; McDonnell v. Southern Cal. Ry.

Von Hamm-Young Co. v. City & County of San Francisco

29 Cal. 2d 798 · California Supreme Court · Mar 14, 1947

Blasius, 290 U.S. 1 [ 54 S.Ct. 34 , 78 L.Ed. 131 ] ; American Steel & Wire Co. v. Speed, 192 U.S. 500 [ 24 S.Ct. 365 , 48 L.Ed. 538 ]; Brown v. Houston, 114 U.S. 622 [ 5 S.Ct. 1091 , 29 L.Ed. 257 ].) … In Carson Petroleum Co. v.

Nat. Bank Etc. v. Western Pac. Ry. Co.

157 Cal. 573 · California Supreme Court · Apr 7, 1910

Dalzell Brown. The certificate for these shares was duly indorsed by Brown and delivered "to the plaintiff. The consideration paid for the stock by the plaintiff was twenty-five thousand dollars. … Brown was indebted to the defendant in a sum exceeding fifty thousand dollars.

Slater v. Blackwood

15 Cal. 3d 791 · California Supreme Court · Dec 24, 1975

We consider, and will reject, the contention that the unconstitutionality of the guest statute enunciated by us in Brown v. … Plaintiff, however, points to certain language in Brown v.

Ventura Group Ventures, Inc. v. Ventura Port District

104 Cal. Rptr. 2d 53 · California Supreme Court · Feb 15, 2001

Opinion BROWN, J. We granted the request of the United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for the answers to the following certified questions of law under rule 29.5 of the California Rules of Court: 1 “1. … Sections 51329 to 51334 of the Water Code establish procedures for an aggrieved person to file with the county board of supervisors a written objection to the assessment valuations, for the board of supervisors to conduct

Burroughs v. De Couts

70 Cal. 361 · California Supreme Court · Jul 31, 1886

In the late case of Brown v. … (Brodribb v. Tibbits, 63 Cal. 80 .)

Kidder v. Stevens

60 Cal. 414 · California Supreme Court · Apr 29, 1882

Brown the executor thereof. … (So held in Salmon v. Symonds, 24 Cal. 264 .)

Los Angeles Gas & Electric Co. v. County of Los Angeles

162 Cal. 164 · California Supreme Court · Feb 2, 1912

In Southern Oregon Co. v. … The cases of Columbia Savings Bank v. Los Angeles Co., 137 Cal. 467 , [ 70 Pac. 308 ], and Board of Commissioners v.

Golden Gate Lumber Co. v. Sahrbacher

105 Cal. 114 · California Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1894

. *116 The first payment was due when the building was framed, and the second payment when the brown coat of mortar was on. … Haynes, 49 Cal. 596 ; Packard v. Wilson, 72 Cal. 124 ; Fanning v. Leviston, 93 Cal. 186 . It is ordered that the judgment and order be reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.

Walker v. County of Los Angeles

55 Cal. 2d 626 · California Supreme Court · Apr 20, 1961

(Hoyt v. Board of Civil Service Commrs., 21 Cal.2d 399, 401 [ 132 P.2d 804 ].) … The cases on which defendants rely concern wholly different problems: Lamb v. Board of County Peace Officers Ret.

Windt v. Covert

152 Cal. 350 · California Supreme Court · Nov 29, 1907

(Campbell v. Freeman, 99 Cal. 546, 548 , [ 34 Pac. 113 ]; Woodard v. Hennegan, 128 Cal. 293 , [ 60 Pac. 769 ]; Banta v. Wise, 135 Cal. 277 , [ 67 Pac. 129 ].) … In Foster v. Furlong, 8 N. Dak. 282, [ 78 N.

Mastick v. Thorp

29 Cal. 444 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1866

(The Board of Commissioners of the Funded Debt of the City of San José v. Younger, ante, 172.)

Riley v. Forbes

193 Cal. 740 · California Supreme Court · Jun 7, 1924

(Railroad Commission v. Riley, 192 Cal. 54 [218 Pac. 415]; Keiser v. State Board of Control, 192 Cal. 129 [ 218 Pac. 1016 ]; Jamme v. Riley, 192 Cal. 125 [ 218 Pac. 578 ]; Western Shore Lumber Co. v. … Riley, 192 Cal. 144 [ 218 Pac. 761 ]; Board of Osteopathic Examiners v. Riley, 192 Cal. 158 [ 218 Pac. 1018 ].) It was held in Railroad Com. v.

Thompson v. City of Long Beach

41 Cal. 2d 235 · California Supreme Court · Jul 7, 1953

(Odden v. County Foresters etc. Board, 108 Cal.App.2d 48, 49 [ 238 P.2d 23 ] ; see, also, Code Civ. Proc., § 1094.5, subdivision (c) ; Bank of America v. Mundo, 37 Cal.2d 1, 5 [ 229 P.2d 345 ].) … (Nider v. City Com., 36 Cal.App.2d 14, 20 [ 97 P.2d 293 ] ; Nunes v. Board of Civil Service Comrs., 88 Cal.App.2d 632, 636 [ 199 P.2d 311 ] ; Fickeisen v. Civil Service Com., 98 Cal. App.2d 419, 421 [ 220 P.2d 605 ].)