Case law

Betts v. Board of Administration

21 Cal. 3d 859 · California Supreme Court · Aug 17, 1978

(Abbott v. City of Los Angeles, supra, 50 Cal.2d at pp. 449-453; Frank v. Board of Administration (1976) 56 Cal.App.3d 236, 245 [ 128 Cal.Rptr. 378 ]; see Abbott v. … Under the circumstances of this case, the Board’s contention cannot be sustained. In asserting that termination of the “fluctuating” system was reasonable here, the Board relies heavily on Lyon v.

McFadden v. Board of Supervisors

74 Cal. 571 · California Supreme Court · Jan 25, 1888

When this is done, we are of opinion that a *574 board of supervisors can have no more power over the rates to be paid by the stockholders than in the case of individuals. … If not a stockholder, he has no right to interfere in any way in the fixing of rates, or to call on the board of supervisors to fix the rates for writer sold or used.

McCoy v. Board of Supervisors

18 Cal. 2d 193 · California Supreme Court · Jun 30, 1941

Its primary object, as declared in the early case of People v. … See, also, Kennedy v. Cook 285 Ky. 9 [ 146 S. W. (2d) 56 ]; Carpenter v. Sheppard, 135 Tex. 413 [ 145 S. W. (2d) 562 ].

Huskinson & Brown, Limited Liability Partnership v. Wolf

9 Cal. Rptr. 3d 693 · California Supreme Court · Feb 23, 2004

In Chambers v. … (E.g., Jeffry v.

Clement v. State Reclamation Board

35 Cal. 2d 628 · California Supreme Court · Aug 2, 1950

Motions for nonsuit were granted to the individual members of the State Reclamation Board, and the cause was tried against the State of California and the state agencies charged with the maintenance and control of the project … He filed a claim therefor with the State Board of Control on May *645 7, 1942. That claim was not rejected by the board until September 22, 1944, and the complaint in this action was filed on October 16,1944.

Morcos v. Board of Retirement

51 Cal. 3d 924 · California Supreme Court · Nov 26, 1990

Similarly, in Roberts v. … The Board additionally relies upon Holtz v.

Veterans' Welfare Board v. Jordan

189 Cal. 124 · California Supreme Court · Jun 13, 1922

In the case of Veterans’ Welfare Board v. … Reclamation Board v. Clausen, 110 Wash. 525, 530 [14 A. L. R. 1133, 188 Pac. 538 ], held a land settlement act eonstitu *144 tional.

Curtis v. Board of Supervisors

7 Cal. 3d 942 · California Supreme Court · Sep 19, 1972

.; wealth [citing Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections (1966) 383 U.S. 663 ]; tax status [citing Kramer v. … Board of Education (1967) 387 U.S. 105 [ 18 L.Ed.2d 650 , 87 S.Ct. 1549 ], had confirmed that school boards need not be elected. Phoenix v.

Miller v. Board of Supervisors

63 Cal. 2d 343 · California Supreme Court · Sep 30, 1965

Board of Supervisors, 60 Cal.2d 318 [ 33 Cal.Rptr. 101 , 384 P.2d 421 ]. We held in that ease (see also Griffin v. … (See Ellis v.

Griggs v. Board of Trustees

61 Cal. 2d 93 · California Supreme Court · Mar 5, 1964

In Horner v. … Co. v. Kings County Water Dist., 47 Cal.2d 140,143-144 [ 302 P.2d 1 ]; Riggins v. Board of Education, 144 Cal.App.2d 232, 237 [ 300 P.2d 848 ].)

Creighton v. Board of Supervisors

42 Cal. 446 · California Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1871

(Creighton v. Manson, 27 Cal. 629 .) … To this petition of Creighton, stating substantially the foregoing facts, the Board of Supervisors have filed a demurrer and an answer.

Miller v. Board of Education

44 Cal. 166 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1872

Siller v. Board of Supervisors

58 Cal. 2d 479 · California Supreme Court · Oct 2, 1962

Co. v. Kings County Water Dist. (1956) 47 Cal.2d 140, 143 [1] [ 302 P.2d 1 ]; Lindell Co. v. Board of Permit Appeals (1943) 23 Cal.2d 303, 315 [5] [ 144 P.2d 4 ].) … Board of Zoning Appeals (1950) 301 N.Y. 86 [ 92 N.E.2d 903 ]; Devaney v. Board of Zoning Appeals (1946) 132 Conn. 537 [ 45 A.2d 828 ].)

Boling v. Public Employment Relations Board

236 Cal. Rptr. 3d 109 · California Supreme Court · Aug 2, 2018

We will uphold the Board’s decision if it is supported by substantial evidence on the whole record.’ ” (Regents of University of California v. … (Board of Education v. Jack M. (1977) 19 Cal.3d 691, 698, fn. 3; see Haworth v. Superior Court (2010) 50 Cal.4th 372, 384-385.) 14 437; Eisenberg et al., Cal.

Merriam v. Board of Supervisors

72 Cal. 517 · California Supreme Court · Jun 13, 1887

It may be that facts exist which would justify the board in allowing the claims. We must presume that the board will do its duty, and we cannot assume that the claims will be allowed improperly. … Besides, as stated in Linden v. Case, supra, even if the board should allow them, the county and tax-payers are not without remedy.

Giddings v. Board of Trustees

165 Cal. 695 · California Supreme Court · Jun 23, 1913

When the act of April 4, 1911, was enacted the *698 city of San Buenaventura, through its board of trustees, possessed the power to regulate or prohibit such traffic. … under the Initiative Act and under the constitution to exercise the same powers which the board of trustees may exercise.

Veterans' Welfare Board v. Riley

189 Cal. 159 · California Supreme Court · Jun 17, 1922

Thompson et al., 66 Vt. 665 [ 30 Atl. 5 ]; Queeny v. Higgins, 136 Iowa, 573 [ 114 N. W. 51 ] ; Board of Education v. Atwood, 74 N. J. L. 638 [ 65 Atl. 999 ]; Harris v. School Dist., 72 N. … We have held in the opinion already filed (Veterans’ Welfare Board v.

Kahn v. Board of Supervisor

79 Cal. 388 · California Supreme Court · Jun 1, 1889

Justice McKee in Mulligan v. Smith, 59 Cal. 206 . … The case of Lent v. Tillson, 72 Cal. 404 , is in accord with these views.

Bates v. Board of Education

139 Cal. 145 · California Supreme Court · May 26, 1903

In section 1791 it is provided that each city board of examination has power, among other things, to recommend to the city board of education the revocation of any certificate previously granted, for immoral or unprofessional … That case was by a bare majority of the court, and, as said in Marion v. Board of Education, 97 Cal. 608 , ‘.‘that case goes quite far enough."

Youngblood v. Board of Supervisors

22 Cal. 3d 644 · California Supreme Court · Nov 20, 1978

We therefore affirm the judgment of the superior court in Youngblood v. Board of Supervisors. Because plaintiffs in Zable v. … Bell v. Board of Supervisors (1976) 55 Cal.App.3d 629, 637 [ 127 Cal.Rptr. 757 ].)