Case law

People v. Garrison

47 Cal. 3d 746 · California Supreme Court · Jan 5, 1989

Neither ruling improperly restricted the cross-examination of Brown. Sufficient facts suggesting Brown’s bias were disclosed so the jury could adequately weigh his credibility. (People v. … (California v. Brown (1987) 479 U.S. 538 [ 93 L.Ed.2d 934, 940 , 107 S.Ct. 837, 839 ].) While the initial focus is on the specific instruction challenged (Francis v.

In Re Lindley

29 Cal. 2d 709 · California Supreme Court · Feb 18, 1947

In answer to the question, “Why did you first believe you had on brown pants?”, the witness replied, “Because I like brown.” … But he erroneously identified a blue hat as brown, *718 a grey coat as black, and a brown hat and trousers as black.

Mays v. City of Los Angeles

74 Cal. Rptr. 3d 891 · California Supreme Court · Apr 17, 2008

(Baggett v. Gates (1982) 32 Cal.3d 128, 135 [ 185 Cal.Rptr. 232 , 649 P.2d 874 ]; see also White v. … (See Sulier v.

Pool v. Simmons

134 Cal. 621 · California Supreme Court · Dec 3, 1901

(Capron v. Hitchcock, 98 Cal. 427 ; Matter of Yick Wo, 68 Cal. 304 ; 1 Christy v. Board of Supervisors of Sacramento County, 39 Cal. 10 .) … Harlin, 99 Cal. 540 ; County of Siskiyou v. Gamlich, 110 Cal. 98 ; Tehama County v. Bryan, 68 Cal. 63 ; County of San Mateo v. Coburn, 130 Cal. 631 .)

McCarty v. Southern Pacific Co.

148 Cal. 211 · California Supreme Court · Nov 13, 1905

Co. v. Alameda W. Co., 36 Cal. 639 ; Curran v. Shattuck, 24 Cal. 432 ; Stanford v. Worn, 27 Cal. 174 ; Creighton v. Manson, 27 Cal. 628 ; Smith v. Davis, 30 Cal. 537 ; Trumpler v. Bemerly, 39 Cal. 491 ; Chase v. … (In re Grove St., 61 Cal. 452 ; Haynes v. Meeks, 20 Cal. 315 ; Meeks v. Hahn, 20 Cal. 626 ; Fitch v. Miller, 20 Cal. 382 ; Pryor v. Downey, 50 Cal. 398 , [ 19 Am. Rep. 656 ]; 15 Ency. of Law Pro. 810, 816; 12 Ency.

Gerry of California v. Superior Court

32 Cal. 2d 119 · California Supreme Court · Jun 16, 1948

Workers v. … National Labor Relations Board, 309 U.S. 350, at p. 365 [ 60 S.Ct. 569 , 84 L.Ed. 799 ]. Also, National Labor Relations Board v.

Fare v. Scott K.

24 Cal. 3d 395 · California Supreme Court · May 25, 1979

Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943) [ 87 L.Ed. 1628 , 63 S.Ct. 1178 ]; equal protection against racial discrimination, Brown v. … Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) [ 98 L.Ed. 873 , 74 S.Ct. 686 ]; due process in civil contexts, Goss v.

People v. Harrison

57 Cal. 4th 1211 · California Supreme Court · Oct 31, 2013

And the Board‟s interpretation has been consistent over the past 26 years. Accordingly, we will not overturn the Board‟s definition of the section 2962 criteria “ „ “unless clearly erroneous.” ‟ ” (Sara M. v. … Name of Opinion People v.

La Grange Hydraulic Gold Mining Co. v. Carter

142 Cal. 560 · California Supreme Court · Mar 18, 1904

It was held by this court in Buswell v. … In County of San Luis Obispo v.

People v. McDaniel

24 Cal. 3d 661 · California Supreme Court · Jul 19, 1979

(See People v. Daniels (1975) 14 Cal.3d 857 [ 122 Cal.Rptr. 872 , 537 P.2d 1232 ]; People v. Brown (1960) 55 Cal.2d 64 [ 9 Cal.Rptr. 816 , 357 P.2d 1072 ].) … Four cases bear examination regarding this contention: People v. Shephard (1959) 169 Cal.App.2d 283 [ 337 P.2d 214 ]; People v. Brown (1960) 55 Cal.2d 64 [ 9 Cal.Rptr. 816 , 357 P.2d 1072 ]; People v.

Kesler v. Pabst

43 Cal. 2d 254 · California Supreme Court · Jul 13, 1954

In Flores v. … (See Flores v. Brown, supra, 39 Cal.2d 622, 632 .)

County of San Luis Obispo v. White

91 Cal. 432 · California Supreme Court · Sep 28, 1891

(Irrigation Dist. v. De Lappe, 79 Cal. 358 . See also County *437 of Santa Clara v. … Thus there was one of two. methods for the board to adopt in the present case, and they having decided to simply publish it for five weeks before the election, their action must be sustained. (Comstock v.

Boyd v. Huntington

215 Cal. 473 · California Supreme Court · May 13, 1932

Petitioner in support of his contention that the term runs with the officer and not the office, cites us to the cases of People v. Langdon, 8 Cal. 1 ; People v. Nickel, 9 Cal. … J., p. 946; Simpson v. Willard, 14 S. C. 191; Bruce v. Matlock, 86 Ark. 555 [ 111 S. W. 990 ].)

Beveridge v. Livingstone

54 Cal. 54 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1879

, and on the Board, upon such report being received, a like obligation to advertise and relet the contract. … In opposition to this view, Taylor v. Palmer, 31 Cal. 246 , is cited by respondent’s counsel. That case, so far as this point is concerned, is commented upon and doubted in Turney v.

O'Farrell v. County of Sonoma

189 Cal. 343 · California Supreme Court · Jul 28, 1922

(Marteeney v. Louth, 197 Ill. App. 106, 115, 116 ; Saws v. County Court, 86 W. Va. 650 [ 104 S. E. 119, 121 ]; Whitner v. Woodruff, 68 Fla. 465 [ 67 South. 110, 111 ]; Pine v. … Baker, 76 Okl. 62 [ 184 Pac. 445, 451 ]; Thompson v. Pierce County, 113 Wash. 237 [ 193 Pac. 706, 707 ]; Carson v. Road Improvement Dist. No. 2, 150 Ark. 379 [ 234 S. W. 257 ].)

Youst v. Longo

43 Cal. 3d 64 · California Supreme Court · Jan 2, 1987

In Buckaloo v. … In Gold v.

Hunt v. Broderick

104 Cal. 313 · California Supreme Court · Oct 2, 1894

In Weed v. Maynard, 52 Cal. 560 , Enkle v. Edgar, 63 Cal. 188 , San Francisco Gas Light Co. v. Dunn, 62 Cal. 580 , Welch v. … Falk v.

Albonico v. Madera Irrigation District

53 Cal. 2d 735 · California Supreme Court · Feb 29, 1960

The superior court’s power of review in such cases is limited to determining whether there was substantial evidence before the board to support its decision. (Atchison etc. Ry. Co. v. … The board made the basic and ultimate finding of benefit. Such a finding of ultimate fact generally is sufficient (California Shipbuilding Corp. v. Industrial Acc.

McVerry v. Boyd

89 Cal. 304 · California Supreme Court · May 28, 1891

(Raisch v. San Francisco, 80 Cal. 1 ; Beveridge v. Livingstone, 54 Cal. 54 .) 1. … (Hewes v. Reis, 40 Cal. 264 ; Himmelmann v. Hoadley, 44 Cal. 279 ; Dorland v. McGlynn, 47 Cal. 51 ; Boyle v. Hitchcock, 66 Cal. 129 ; Blair v. Lurning, 76 Cal. 135 ; 7 Am. St. Rep. 129 ; Jennings v.

McCabe v. Carpenter

102 Cal. 469 · California Supreme Court · May 22, 1894

In Hughes v. … Manifestly, a much larger discretion is given by the act under consideration to the county superintendent than was given to the board created by that act. The case of Macklin v.