Case law

Peracchi v. Superior Court

135 Cal. Rptr. 2d 639 · California Supreme Court · Jun 23, 2003

II Litigants who establish good cause may disqualify the judge who is assigned to preside over a case. … Further, Maloy contemplated a proceeding in which the trier of fact eventually would resolve the issues without reference to any previous verdict, clearly distinguishing that case from a case involving a resentencing hearing

People v. Padilla

11 Cal. 4th 891 · California Supreme Court · Dec 4, 1995

qualified as overt and was legally and factually sufficient. 5. … I mean that is clearly in the record ... the fact that you gave them.”

People v. Samayoa

15 Cal. 4th 795 · California Supreme Court · Jun 19, 1997

He then qualified his statement by asserting that he still could conceive of choosing *824 a sentence of life imprisonment. … The record does not establish a failure to exercise appropriate discretion.

American Nurses Ass'n v. Torlakson

57 Cal. 4th 570 · California Supreme Court · Aug 12, 2013

Thus, section 49423 and its implementing regulations plainly establish, as the Legislature, the Board and the Department intended, that unlicensed school personnel may administer prescription medications. … In its 2006 FAQ, the Department also invoked the NPA as authority for the following assertion: “California law states, with a few clearly specified legal exceptions, that only a licensed nurse or physician may administer

Asmus v. Pacific Bell

96 Cal. Rptr. 2d 179 · California Supreme Court · Jun 1, 2000

The facts clearly show that employees enjoyed the benefits of the MESP for a reasonable time period, and that Pacific Bell gave its employees reasonable and ample notice of its intent to terminate the MESP. … Instead, the MESP very clearly specifies the duration of the commitment.

Citizens for Covenant Compliance v. Anderson

12 Cal. 4th 345 · California Supreme Court · Dec 29, 1995

Others, having lost their way, plunge on and after weeks of effort emerge not far from where they began, clearly the worse for wear. … Because the convenants in this case are between grantor and grantee and burden the property as well as benefit it, they would not qualify as covenants that run with the land under these provisions.

Raven v. Deukmejian

52 Cal. 3d 336 · California Supreme Court · Dec 24, 1990

But its invalidity does not affect the remaining provisions of Proposition 115, which are clearly severable from the invalid portion. … Evidently in late April or early May 1948, the “California Bill of Rights” initiative measure was certified as qualified for the ballot at the November 2, 1948, General Election.

O'HARE v. Superior Court

43 Cal. 3d 86 · California Supreme Court · Jan 2, 1987

requirements, the court held that the amendment’s guarantee of a jury drawn from the “judicial district” where the crime was committed applied to the local judicial districts which constitute subdivisions of Los Angeles County. 9 Clearly … Code of Civil Procedure section 206a provides: “In counties where sessions of the superior court are held in cities other than the county seat, the names for master jury lists and qualified jury lists to serve in said cities

People v. Baker

42 Cal. 2d 550 · California Supreme Court · Mar 26, 1954

In the present case, there was ample evidence to establish defendant’s insanity prior to the killing of his wife. … The prejudicial nature of the instruction appears most clearly in the difficulties that it creates for the jury in the application of the rule stated in People v.

People v. Diaz

3 Cal. 4th 495 · California Supreme Court · Aug 31, 1992

The failure to discover that Patton was prescribed lidocaine was clearly negligent. … Second, the proponent of the evidence must establish that “the witness furnishing such testimony” is “properly qualified as an expert to give [such] an opinion . . . .” (Kelly, supra, at p. 30 , italics omitted.)

People v. Lancaster

58 Cal. Rptr. 3d 608 · California Supreme Court · May 24, 2007

This testimony was clearly relevant to establish that Taylor was taken against his will, an element of the kidnapping offense. ( People v. Hill (2000) 23 Cal.4th 853, 856 , 98 Cal.Rptr.2d 254 , 3 P.3d 898 ; People v. … Floyd did not testify that the threat was meant for Marston, and his account of Taylor's behavior the next day clearly established Taylor's fearful reaction. [13] In any event, as the trial court pointed out *636 and as defendant

Km v. Eg

33 Cal. Rptr. 3d 61 · California Supreme Court · Aug 22, 2005

Superior Court (2003) 31 Cal.4th 417 , 2 Cal.Rptr.3d 699 , 73 P.3d 554 ) or because both qualify as natural mothers under the Uniform Parentage Act (Fam.Code, § 7600 et seq.) … The statute, when it applies, merely excludes someone as a possible parent; it does not establish parentage.

Pearson v. County of Los Angeles

49 Cal. 2d 523 · California Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1957

Where the express mandatory conditions for a dismissal are clearly established and, as here, without contradiction, the court is without discretion in the matter. [Citations.]” (See also Emerson v. … Petitioner seeks to have his right to a pension established and offers to make all required payments.

People v. Johnson

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.

Jarman v. HCR ManorCare, Inc.

267 Cal. Rptr. 3d 696 · California Supreme Court · Aug 17, 2020

And if a facility does not have regular visitor hours established, has it violated the right to have “daily visiting hours established” (id., subd. … (a)(10)), for example, would clearly be violated multiple times by multiple instances of abuse.

County of San Diego v. Sanfax Corp.

19 Cal. 3d 862 · California Supreme Court · Sep 14, 1977

Co. (1964) 25 Wis.2d 25 [ 130 N.W.2d 296, 299 ].) 8 Clearly, as a matter of workers compensation law, we should apply the one-year statute. … Witt thus qualified an employer’s litigation rights: an employer could recover from a third party through independent action, intervention in an employee’s action, or lien against an employee’s recovery only if the employer

People v. Hagen

80 Cal. Rptr. 2d 24 · California Supreme Court · Dec 7, 1998

California, supra, 386 U.S. at p. 24 [ 87 S.Ct. at p. 828 ] .) 10 For the same reason, the evidence was clearly sufficient to support a finding of willfulness. … United States (1961) 366 U.S. 213 [ 81 S.Ct. 1052 , 6 L.Ed.2d 246 ]), Johnny cannot rely on legal uncertainty to establish lack of willfulness.

People v. Saunders

5 Cal. 4th 580 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1993

As we have seen, the majority reallocates the obligations of the respective participants at trial contrary to well-established law. … But the majority apparently fails to appreciate the significance of the qualifying italicized language.

Albert Pick & Co. v. Jordan

169 Cal. 1 · California Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1914

Rep. 41], where this purely manufacturing and mercantile corporation offended against the same Kansas law, and was held by the supreme court to be immune from punishment therefor, under authority of the Pigg case. … The Dental Manufacturing Company objected to the payment of the tax upon the three grounds so clearly enunciated in Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Kansas.

People v. Moore

47 Cal. 3d 63 · California Supreme Court · Nov 3, 1988

Guilt Phase Evidence The case against defendant was based almost entirely on the testimony of Terry Avery, who was granted immunity from prosecution in exchange for her testimony. … At the request of her attorney, Avery was granted complete immunity for her involvement in the Crumb murders in return for her testimony. At trial, defendant testified on his own behalf.