Case law

In Re Catalano

29 Cal. 3d 1 · California Supreme Court · Feb 11, 1981

Moreover, the exemption of section 552.1 is clearly not intended solely to facilitate union-employee communication. … Whether the 1978 amendment to that subdivision codified existing law, as we stated in Sears, or created new law, it would clearly defeat the legislative purpose if union activities immunized from prosecution under that amendment

Timm Aircraft Corp. v. Byram

34 Cal. 2d 632 · California Supreme Court · Jan 20, 1950

been granted no tax immunity." ( Alabama v. … In my opinion such holding is in direct violation of the established rule of reciprocal immunity against the taxation by either the state or federal government of property owned by the other. ( McCulloch v.

Alexander v. Superior Court

5 Cal. 4th 1218 · California Supreme Court · Oct 14, 1993

Clearly such a result would be contrary to the Legislature’s intent in enacting section 1157.” 9 III. … Code, §§ 43.7 [conditional immunity for actions taken by members of medical staff committees engaged in quality assurance activities], 43.8 [absolute immunity for those who communicate certain information to medical staff

California Farm Bureau Federation v. State Water Resources Control Board

51 Cal. 4th 421 · California Supreme Court · Jan 31, 2011

Under established principles of sovereign immunity, the federal government is immune from state taxation absent its consent. (See Davis v. … Clearly, any attempt to impose fees on the federal government would be resisted on sovereign immunity grounds.

People v. Sassovich

29 Cal. 480 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1866

It is well settled that every Act deliberately passed by the Legislature must be regarded by the # Courts as valid unless it is clearly and manifestly repugnant to some provision of the Constitution. … time to time, by a two-thirds vote of all the members elected to both Houses, as the public good may require.” * * * * It is claimed on the part of the appellant that the number of the districts is permanently fixed and established

People v. Woody

45 Cal. 289 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1873

But whether there was or not, the charge is clearly erroneous. … But in the absence of evidence tending to establish such a conspiracy the charge is, if possible, even more clearly indefensible.

Provigo Corp. v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board

7 Cal. 4th 561 · California Supreme Court · Apr 7, 1994

The use of underage decoys to enforce laws against unlawful sales to minors clearly promotes rather than hinders the foregoing salutary purpose. … In sum, we conclude that petitioners have established neither entrapment nor a due process violation.

State Bar of California v. Superior Court

207 Cal. 323 · California Supreme Court · May 31, 1929

which upon the same terms shall not be granted to all citizens,” we do not deem a discussion of this phase of the State Bar Act to be germane to the issues involved in this special proceeding for reasons which clearly appear … Hardy was, and for some years prior thereof had been, a duly admitted and qualified attorney and counselor at law within the state of California.

County of Santa Clara v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court · Jul 10, 2023

Clearly, the emphasis of the Tort Claims Act is on torts.” (Kizer, at p. 145, fn. 4.) … The County argues, first, that the Hospitals’ compliance with the Government Claims Act’s claims presentation requirements establishes that they seek money or damages covered by the Act’s immunity provisions.

Pac. Emp. Ins. Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com.

19 Cal. 2d 622 · California Supreme Court · Feb 27, 1942

Petitioner argues, however, that even if it be assumed that the evidence established that Ehrhardt contracted the disease in the course of his employment, the application of the doctrine that an injury to be compensable must … Com., supra.) [5] The opinions of qualified medical witnesses with reference to the origin and cause of the injury are valid evidence which will support an award. (Newton v. Industrial Acc.

HFH, LTD. v. Superior Court

15 Cal. 3d 508 · California Supreme Court · Nov 12, 1975

We have recently held that an analogous tort immunity for the denial of a building permit (Gov. … Code, § 818.4) constituted specific legislation qualifying the general rule that one may append a damage claim to a mandate action (Code Civ. Proc., § 1095). (State of California v.

People v. MacIas

16 Cal. 4th 739 · California Supreme Court · Aug 26, 1997

Although we have declared a probationer’s revocation hearing testimony inadmissible during the prosecution’s case in chief, we see no purpose to be served by precluding use of that testimony or its fruits to impeach or rebut clearly … First, the adversarial nature of our judicial system demands that the prosecution provide sufficient evidence to establish guilt without the aid of the minor’s testimony, which would impermissibly lighten the prosecution’

Rojas v. Superior Court

15 Cal. Rptr. 3d 643 · California Supreme Court · Jul 12, 2004

Read together, sections 1119 and 1120 establish that a writing—which qualifies as “ ‘[ejvidence’ ” (§ 140)—is not protected “solely by reason of its introduction or use in a mediation” (§ 1120, subd. … Thus, the Legislature clearly knows how to establish a “good cause” exception to a protection or privilege if it so desires.

Calvillo-Silva v. Home Grocery

80 Cal. Rptr. 2d 506 · California Supreme Court · Dec 17, 1998

have been established. … This provision, however, does not assist the majority, *525 for, while it clearly makes a conviction necessary to application of section 847, it says nothing as to whether such a conviction is sufficient to establish the

People v. Wright

51 Cal. Rptr. 3d 80 · California Supreme Court · Nov 27, 2006

To achieve the goal of “facilitating] the prompt identification of qualified patients and their designated primary caregivers,” the Legislature established a voluntary program for the issuance of identification cards to such … qualified patients. (§ 11362.71 et seq.)

Payne v. City of San Francisco

3 Cal. 122 · California Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1853

It differs essentially from those provisions of law which are construed by the courts as being merely directory; and it does not come within the rule established by this court in the case of The People, ex relatione Harris … Not only did the plaintiff fail to qualify in time, but it does not appear that he ever qualified before a proper officer.

McKee v. Dodd

152 Cal. 637 · California Supreme Court · Jan 21, 1908

In support of appellant’s position under this section it was established in evidence that under the laws of Hawaii an action for the recovery of any debt founded upon any contract, obligation, or liability,' where the cause … His failure in this regard gave rise to the cause of action, and, clearly therefore, that cause of action arose in the state of New York. In a legal sense the cause of action cannot have two places of origin.

Desert Environment Conservation Ass'n v. Public Utilities Commission

8 Cal. 3d 739 · California Supreme Court · Jan 26, 1973

Under these circumstances an order by this court compelling the commission to adopt a particular procedure at this time would contravene the priorities established by the Legislature. … This is not to say, of course, that regulations under the EQA will be immune from review once adopted by the commission.

Taylor v. Board of Trustees

36 Cal. 3d 500 · California Supreme Court · Jul 26, 1984

“In any district in which appointments are made from eligible lists established by examination, special eligible lists shall be established at the end of each school year which consist of the names of those employees who … With all respect, the argument overlooks the history of the pertinent statutes which, as we have demonstrated, quite clearly refutes this interpretation.

Albertson v. Raboff

46 Cal. 2d 375 · California Supreme Court · Apr 10, 1956

(See Veeder, Absolute Immunity in Defamation: Judicial Proceedings, 9 Columb.L.Rev. 463, 469.) … Clearly a person who attempts to establish a claim to property knowing of its falsity can only be motivated by an improper purpose.