Case law

Lake County Mental Health Department v. Susan T.

8 Cal. 4th 1005 · California Supreme Court · Dec 8, 1994

(Brown v. Superior Court (1982) 137 Cal.App.3d 778, 782 [ 187 Cal.Rptr. 324 ]; County of Imperial v. McDougal (1977) 19 Cal.3d 505, 513 [ 138 Cal.Rptr. 472 , 564 P.2d 14 ]; see also, Cal. … The rule has been held applicable in one type of disciplinary proceeding before the State Personnel Board (Dyson v.

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.

Inglin v. Hoppin

156 Cal. 483 · California Supreme Court · Nov 19, 1909

(McDou gall v. Bell, 4 Cal. 179 .) In Thomas v. Armstrong, 7 Cal. 286 , a writ of mandate was sought. The board of supervisors had refused a license to a ferry proprietor. … Co. v.

County of Modoc v. Spencer

103 Cal. 498 · California Supreme Court · Aug 6, 1894

(Robinson v. Supervisors, 16 Cal. 208 ; San Joaquin County v. Jones, 18 Cal. 327 ; Foster v. Coleman, 10 Cal. 279 ; Linden v. Case, 46 Cal. 171 .) … (Linden v. Case, 46 Cal. 171 .) The other questions, as we have indicated, do not demand extended notice.

People v. Johnson

47 Cal. 4th 668 · California Supreme Court · Nov 23, 2009

Brown (1986) 179 Cal.App.3d 207, 215-217 [ 224 Cal.Rptr. 476 ] (Brown). … (People v.

Mazzotta v. Los Angeles Railway Corp.

25 Cal. 2d 165 · California Supreme Court · Nov 10, 1944

Proc., § 657; Brown v. George Pepperdine Foundation, supra; Sheets v. Southern Pac. Co., supra; Thompson v. California Construction Co., supra; Nieves v. … It therefore includes a formula and may be justified only if it contains- all of the elements essential to a recovery (Brown v. George Pepperdine Foundation, supra; Stroud v.

In Re Rosenkrantz

128 Cal. Rptr. 2d 104 · California Supreme Court · Dec 16, 2002

Acting pursuant to article V, section 8(b), the Governor reversed that decision by the Board. … People v.

Russell v. Electrical Workers Local 569

64 Cal. 2d 22 · California Supreme Court · Jan 27, 1966

Similarly in Hattiesburg Unions v. … Two Louisiana cases require declination by the board as a precondition to state action under section 14(c). (Derouen v. Lard (La.App. 1960) 121 So.2d 311 , 315 ; Barksdale & LeBlanc v.

Travis v. County of Santa Cruz

16 Cal. Rptr. 3d 404 · California Supreme Court · Jul 29, 2004

BROWN, J., Concurring and Dissenting. … Department of Transportation (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 1142, 1148 [ 105 Cal.Rptr.2d 179 ], quoting Miller v. Board of Medical Quality Assurance (1987) 193 Cal.App.3d 1371, 1376-1377 [ 238 Cal.Rptr. 915 ].)

San Diego Unified School District v. Commision on State Mandates

16 Cal. Rptr. 3d 466 · California Supreme Court · Aug 2, 2004

Code, § 17521; Kinlaw v. … In Carmel Valley Fire Protection Dist. v.

California School Employees Ass'n v. Personnel Commission of the Pajaro Valley Unified School District

3 Cal. 3d 139 · California Supreme Court · Sep 25, 1970

(Morris v. Williams, 67 Cal.2d 733, 748 [ 63 Cal.Rptr. 689 , 433 P.2d 697 ]; Ellis v. Board of Education, 27 Cal.2d 322, 325 [ 164 P.2d 1 ]; Whitcomb Hotel, Inc. v. California Emp. … (Sacramento Chamber of Commerce v. Stephens, 212 Cal. 607, 610 [ 299 P. 728 ]; Webster v. Board of Education, 140 Cal. 331, 332 [ 73 P. 1070 ]; City of Redwood City v.

Denning v. State

123 Cal. 316 · California Supreme Court · Jan 19, 1899

(Chapman v. State, 104 Cal. 690 ; 43 Am. St. Rep. 158 ; Melvin v. State, 121 Cal. 16 .) Respondent’s first point cannot, therefore, be sustained. … In Melvin v.

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.

Irwin v. County of Yuba

119 Cal. 686 · California Supreme Court · Jan 27, 1898

(Dougherty v. Austin, 94 Cal. 602 ; and see, also, Welsh v. Bramlet, 98 Cal. 222 .) It will hardly be contended that the board could delegate any of its powers to this debris association. … The same doctrine was enunciated in Board of Supervisors v. Allis. 59 N. Y. 620 . So, also, in Moore v. Toledo City Independent Dist., 55 Iowa, 654 , and numerous other cases which might be cited.

Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Industrial Accident Commission

39 Cal. 2d 512 · California Supreme Court · Aug 28, 1952

Piusinski v. … A somewhat similar situation occurred in O'Leavy v. Brown-Pacific-Maxon, Inc., 340 U.S. 504 [ 71 S.Ct. 470 , 95 L.Ed. 483 ], although in the latter case the death occurred off the employer's premises.

County of Siskiyou v. Gamlich

110 Cal. 94 · California Supreme Court · Nov 18, 1895

(Damrell v. San Joaquin County, 40 Cal. 154 ; Humboldt County v. Dinsmore, 75 Cal. 604 ; Los Angeles County v. San Jose etc. Water Co., 96 Cal. 93 .) 2. … (Los Angeles County v. San Jose etc. Water Co., supra.) All these facts were sufficiently proved by the plaintiff. 4.

People v. Dunn

59 Cal. 328 · California Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1881

(Wells, Fargo & Co. v. State Board of Equalization, 56 Cal. 194 .) … Where, in such case, is the equality or uniformity which is the controlling idea of the Constitution V (Houghton v. Austin, 47 Cal. 673 .)

City of Napa v. Easterby

61 Cal. 509 · California Supreme Court · Oct 9, 1882

The charter requires that the Board of Trustees shall “ cause to be published ” all ordinances. This means that the Board shall order the publication. (Temple, J., in Chambers v. Satterlee, 40 Cal. 521 ; Donnelly v. … Tillman, 47 id. 41; Donnelly v. Marks, id. 191; Himmelmann v. Satterlee , 49 id. 387; Reis v. Graff, 51 id. 90.)

Meyer v. City of San Diego

121 Cal. 102 · California Supreme Court · May 31, 1898

Rep. 180 ; Commonwealth v. Reed, 1 Gray, 472 ; Ellis v. Smith, 42 Ala. 349 ; Fine v. St. Louis Public Schools, 30 Mo. 166 ; Stockwell v. Township Board, supra; Fiske v. Paine, 18 R. I. 632; Dimes v. … (Story’s Equity Pleading, secs. 97, 98; 1 Freeman on Judgments, sec. 178; Brown v. Trousdale, 138 U. S. 389 ; Gamble v. San Diego, 79 Fed. Rep. 487.)

McKeon v. Neuschwander

209 Cal. 283 · California Supreme Court · Apr 7, 1930

(Brown v. Anderson-Cottonwood Irr. Dist., supra (p. 188.) … (Brown v. Anderson-Cottonwood Irr. Dist., supra (p. 188.)