Case law

Morton v. Broderick

118 Cal. 474 · California Supreme Court · Oct 6, 1897

(Braidy v. Theritt, 17 Kan. 468 ; Hamlin v. Kassafer, 15 Or. 456 ; 3 Am. St. Rep. 176 ; State v. Draper, supra; State v. Johnson, supra; Lawrence v. Hanley, supra; State v. Atlantic City, supra.) … (Truman v. Board, 110 Cal. 128 .)

Varney & Green v. Williams

155 Cal. 318 · California Supreme Court · Mar 8, 1909

(McQueen v. Phelan, 4 Cal. App. 695 , [ 88 Pac. 1099 ].) But the finding that the boards did constitute a nuisance is attacked as contrary to the evidence. … Rep. 676 , 62 Atl. 267 ], or at a distance from the street exceeding by at least five feet the height of the bill-board (Crawford v. City of Topeka, 51 Kan. 756 , [ 37 Am. St.

Marcone v. Dowell

178 Cal. 396 · California Supreme Court · Jun 10, 1918

(Los Angeles and Arizona Land Co. v. Marr, ante, p. 243, [ 173 Pac. 83 ].) … This principle is well stated in the quotation which respondents make from Bernhardt v. Brown, 122 N. C. 587—590, [ 65 Am. St. Rep. 725 , 29 S.

People v. Martin

42 Cal. 3d 437 · California Supreme Court · Aug 21, 1986

in People v. … People v. Herrera, supra, 127 Cal.App.3d 590 , People v. Mitchell, supra, 152 Cal.App.3d 433 , and People v.

Chambers v. Satterlee

40 Cal. 497 · California Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1871

Since the decision in Taylor v. … So, in the case of Nolan v.

Shelton v. City of Los Angeles

206 Cal. 544 · California Supreme Court · Feb 25, 1929

A. 755, 28 Pac. 272, 675 ]; Robertson v. Board of Library Trustees, 136 Cal. 403 [ 69 Pac. 88 ].) … Rep. 586 , 33 Atl. 256 ] ; Gunnison v. Board of Education, 176 N. T. 11 [ 68 N. E. 106 ]; Winston v. City of Spokane, 12 Wash. 524 [ 41 Pac. 888 ]; Uhler v.

People v. Caballero

55 Cal. 4th 262 · California Supreme Court · Aug 16, 2012

(Robinson v. … Name of Opinion People v.

Curran v. Shattuck.

24 Cal. 427 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1864

The Board or officer must find the power to ascertain the compensation within the statute. A resort cannot be had for that purpose to implication. (Sharp v. Spire, 4 Hill, 76 ; Sharp v. Johnson, Ibid. 92 .) … (People v. Huber, 20 Cal. 81 ; Hallett v. Righter, 13 How. Pr. R. 43; Sedgwick on Stat. and Const. Law, 319.)

In Re Ross

10 Cal. 4th 184 · California Supreme Court · May 8, 1995

(Strickland v. … In People v.

People v. McWilliams

California Supreme Court · Feb 23, 2023

guided by three factors first set out in Brown v. … (Brown, at p. 604.)

Edwards v. Steele

25 Cal. 3d 406 · California Supreme Court · Oct 4, 1979

(See, e.g., Garrison v. Rourke (1948) 32 Cal.2d 430, 435-436 [ 196 P.2d 884 ]; Pulcifer v. County of Alameda (1946) 29 Cal.2d 258, 262 [ 175 P.2d 1 ]; Francis v. … Code, § 5313]; see also McDonald’s Systems of California, Inc., v. Board of Permit Appeals, supra, 44 Cal.App.3d at p. 541.)

Western Oil & Gas Ass'n v. Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District

49 Cal. 3d 408 · California Supreme Court · Aug 17, 1989

(Western Oil & Gas Assn. v. Air Resources Board, supra, 37 Cal.3d 502, 520 .) … Deukmejian v.

Merriam v. Barnum

116 Cal. 619 · California Supreme Court · Apr 29, 1897

In Smith v. … In Hornblower v. Duden, 35 Cal. 664 , the board of supervisors of El Dorado county had employed James McM.

Southern Pacific Co. v. Prosser

122 Cal. 413 · California Supreme Court · Nov 25, 1898

Proc., sec. 360; McCormick v. Brown, 36 Cal. 180, 184, 185 ; Biddle v. Brizzolara, 56 Cal. 374 ; Tuggle v. Minor, 76 Cal. 96 ; Wood on Limitations, secs. 68, 85.) … Justice Temple says in his opinion that Smith v. Richmond, supra, was overruled in McCormick v. Brown, supra, as to this point.

Garmon v. San Diego Building Trades Council

45 Cal. 2d 657 · California Supreme Court · Dec 2, 1955

However, the board need not accept every controversy of which it has jurisdiction. (Haleston Drug Stores v. National Labor Relations Board, 187 F.2d 418 . … (Also see: National Labor Relations Board v. Guy F. Atkinson Co., 195 F.2d 141 .)

City of Moorpark v. Superior Court

77 Cal. Rptr. 2d 445 · California Supreme Court · Aug 17, 1998

BROWN, Justice, concurring and dissenting. I concur in the majority's conclusion that plaintiff Theresa L. … (See Stevenson, supra, 16 Cal.4th at pp. 914-915, 66 Cal.Rptr.2d 888 , 941 P.2d 1157 (dis. opn. of Brown, J.).)

People v. Millum

42 Cal. 2d 524 · California Supreme Court · Mar 16, 1954

(Brown v. Mississippi, supra, 297 U.S. at p. 286 .) … (Lee v. Mississippi, supra, 332 U.S. 742; Brown v. Mississippi, supra, 297 U.S. 278 ; People v. Rodriguez, supra, 58 Cal.App.2d 415 .)

Gilde v. Superior Court

147 Cal. 21 · California Supreme Court · May 26, 1905

(Williams v. Supervisors, 65 Cal. 160 ; Bixler v. Supervisors, 59 Cal. 698 ; People v. District No. 108, 53 Cal. 346 ; Reclam a tion Dist. v. Gray, 95 Cal. 601 ; Reclamation Dist. v. Silver, 98 Cal. 53 ; People v. … (See, also, County of San Mateo v. Coburn, 130 Cal. 631 ; Wulzen v. Supervisors, 101 Cal. 15 ; County of Siskiyou v. Gamlich, 110 Cal. 94 ; Farmers’ Bank v. Board, etc., 97 Cal. 318 .)

Vandermost v. Bowen

53 Cal. 4th 421 · California Supreme Court · Jan 27, 2012

Eu, supra, 1 Cal.4th 707 ; Assembly v. Deukmejian, supra, 30 Cal.3d 638 ; Legislature v. Reinecke, supra, 10 Cal.3d 396 ; Silver v. Brown (1965) 63 Cal.2d 270 [ 46 Cal.Rptr. 308 , 405 P.2d 132 ].) … Brown, supra, 63 Cal.2d at pp. 277-278; Perry v. Jordan (1949) 34 Cal.2d 87, 90-91 [ 207 P.2d 47 ].)

People v. Gleason

122 Cal. 370 · California Supreme Court · Nov 19, 1898

(P eople v. Hickman, 113 Cal. 80 ; People v. Mayes, 113 Cal. 618 .) They did not, however, make any attempt to attack his credibility, and as a witness he stood before the jury in the same light as any other witness. … (People v. Devine, 95 Cal. 227 ; Comptoir D’Escompte v. Dresbach, 78 Cal. 15 ; In re Calkins, 112 Cal. 296 .)