Case law

Loder v. Municipal Court

17 Cal. 3d 859 · California Supreme Court · Sep 2, 1976

An arrest record is clearly a document which may properly be kept by a public officer in the discharge of his duties, and hence is within the scope of the statute. (See People v. … The Legislature has established multiple safeguards against the improper dissemination of arrest records.

People v. Johnson

12 Cal. 5th 544 · California Supreme Court · Jan 3, 2022

We agree that Edwards establishes a bright-line rule. … Second, Patterson clearly informed defendant at the start of the encounter that his statements could be used against him.

People v. Torres

California Supreme Court · May 4, 2020

They testified under grants of use immunity. On the evening of March 19, 2001, defendant, Mosqueda, Van Kleef, Torres, Ayala, and another friend, Erick Tinoco, were at Alvarez’s apartment. … The principles that guide our analysis are well established.

L.A. All. for Survival v. City of Los Angeles

93 Cal. Rptr. 2d 1 · California Supreme Court · Mar 2, 2000

) 11 Cal.3d 77, 84-85 , 112 Cal.Rptr. 777 , 520 P.2d 1 (Dulaney ).) [7] As plaintiffs note, decisions applying the liberty of speech clause, like those applying the First Amendment, long have recognized that in order to qualify … At the same time, however, the court clearly explained that the activity of soliciting funds may be regulated by a properly written ordinance: "The occupation of soliciting contributions to charitable purposes is clearly

People v. Richards

63 Cal. 4th 291 · California Supreme Court · May 26, 2016

Sperber had previously qualified as a forensic odontologist in 26 states in more than 100 cases, more than 80 of which involved bite mark evidence. … Sperber clearly repudiated his trial testimony. In the habeas corpus proceedings, Dr.

People v. Scott

21 Cal. 3d 284 · California Supreme Court · May 16, 1978

The Blackford court said of the rectal search in that case "As to the actual physical examinations, they were conducted by qualified physicians, under sanitary conditions, with the use of medically approved procedures. … Clearly there was probable cause to believe that evidence of defendant's alleged crime would be revealed by the examination. The importance of the evidence sought.

Glendale City Employees' Ass'n v. City of Glendale

15 Cal. 3d 328 · California Supreme Court · Oct 3, 1975

Defendants refer to the grievance procedure established by Ordinance No. 3830, enacted in 1968. … The adoption of that ordinance was clearly a legislative act, as, indeed, is the passage or rejection of any ordinance.

Fair v. Bakhtiari

51 Cal. Rptr. 3d 871 · California Supreme Court · Dec 14, 2006

arbitration clauses, forum selection clauses, choice of law provisions, terms contemplating remedies for breach, and similar commonly employed enforcement provisions typically negotiated in settlement discussions do not qualify … If there is no evidence establishing a manifestation of assent to the `same thing' by both parties, then there is no mutual consent to contract and no contract formation." ( Weddington, supra, 60 Cal.

Solberg v. Superior Court

19 Cal. 3d 182 · California Supreme Court · Mar 22, 1977

But it is argued that removal of a judge on unauthorized grounds artificially reduces the pool of qualified judges available to hear the case, injects an element of lawlessness into the judicial process, and operates in each … Although we did not pause to catalog the various misuses of the statute, the practices now complained of were clearly within the contemplation of the court.

Emde v. San Joaquin County Central Labor Council

23 Cal. 2d 146 · California Supreme Court · Nov 2, 1943

And the allegations of the complaint charging malice on the part of each of the appellants is supported by the evidence, which defeats a defense of qualified privilege and justifies the award of punitive damages. … If the dairy considered the union publicity to be unfair or misrepresentative, its remedy was to answer the charges by counter-publicity of its own, for the constitutional right of free speech is just as clearly a right *

People v. Giordano

68 Cal. Rptr. 3d 51 · California Supreme Court · Nov 26, 2007

The court reasoned that she “clearly suffered a loss as a result of defendant’s criminal activity, including the loss of income her husband would have earned, and she was therefore entitled to any wages decedent may have … Without speculating as to reasons that might qualify as “compelling and extraordinary,” we observe only that this exception does not exclude entire categories of loss.

People v. Sandoval

62 Cal. 4th 394 · California Supreme Court · Dec 24, 2015

It then compounds this factual error with a legal one: engaging in a mode of analysis that we clearly rejected just four years ago. … Moreover, the federal approach is clearly at odds with our state constitutional duty as a reviewing court.

Transportation Guarantee Co. v. Jellins

29 Cal. 2d 242 · California Supreme Court · Nov 15, 1946

Defendant calls our attention to the finding that “plaintiff is not and at no time covered by either of said contracts has been, qualified as an insurance company ... to transact an insurance business . . . and . . . plaintiff … Twenty-five dollars ($25.00) deductible,” clearly refers to the following provision of the same section which reads: ‘ ‘ The Contractor agrees to make good any damage done to Owner’s motor vehicle caused by collision, except

In Re Lucero L.

96 Cal. Rptr. 2d 56 · California Supreme Court · May 22, 2000

She indicated, though not very clearly, that her "Papa" had touched her with his penis. She could not say how the touching had occurred, although she said she had seen her father's penis. … The Legislature clearly was concerned that a young child can easily be influenced. Evidence of such influence can cast serious doubt on the reliability of a young child's statements.

Catholic Mutual Relief Society v. Superior Court

64 Cal. Rptr. 3d 434 · California Supreme Court · Aug 27, 2007

The term “any insurance carrier” in section 2017.210 is qualified by the circumstance that the carrier “may be liable to satisfy in whole or in part a judgment that may be entered in the action.” (§ 2017.210.) … “In a fronting arrangement—a well-established and perfectly legal scheme—policies are issued by a state licensed insurance company and then immediately reinsured 100 percent of their face value by the out-of-state unlicensed

King v. Thierry S.

19 Cal. 3d 727 · California Supreme Court · Jul 22, 1977

An exception to the general-special rule of construction is made where a contrary legislative intent is clearly expressed. (Warne v. … Courts commonly set forth a general proposition *748 and then in succeeding sentences proceed to amplify, modify, explain, qualify or set forth exceptions. Indeed, I did so in the immediately preceding paragraph.

People v. Modiri

46 Cal. Rptr. 3d 762 · California Supreme Court · Aug 7, 2006

Under Cole , someone who does not strike or otherwise personally use force upon the victim does not qualify for enhanced punishment where the personal infliction of harm is required. … Together, section 1192.7(c)(8) and section 667, which was enacted at the same time, established a sentencing enhancement for any defendant convicted of a serious felony who was previously convicted of a serious felony.

Beckett v. Selover

7 Cal. 215 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1857

Nor is the creditor deficient in any remedies which may be necessary for the establishment of his rights. … The preponderance of authority would seem to be clearly against the position of defendant’s counsel.

People v. Ashmus

54 Cal. 3d 932 · California Supreme Court · Dec 5, 1991

They also presented evidence to establish the facts underlying the latter conviction. … Within their context— *970 clearly in the transcript and more clearly still on the audiotape—defendant’s words cannot reasonably be deemed an invocation of his right to silence.

The People v. Jones

California Supreme Court · Oct 2, 2013

[N]ot all who oppose the death penalty are subject to removal for cause in capital cases; those who firmly believe that the death penalty is unjust may nevertheless serve as jurors in capital cases so long as they state clearly … This claim fails because no evidence establishes such agency.