Case law

McIntosh v. State Bar

211 Cal. 261 · California Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1930

(State Bar v. Superior Court, 207 Cal. 323 [ 278 Pac. 432 ]; In re Cate, 207 Cal. 443 [ 279 Pac. 131 ] ; Matter of Shattuck, 208 Cal. 6 [ 278 Pac. 998 ] ; Matter of Richardson, 209 Cal. 492 [ 288 Pac. 669 ].) … The remaining contention is whether the evidence is sufficient to support the findings and the conclusions reached by the Board of Governors.

Torres v. Automobile Club of Southern California

15 Cal. 4th 771 · California Supreme Court · Jun 2, 1997

Cruz (1996) 13 Cal.4th 764, 774-775 [ 55 Cal.Rptr.2d 117 , 919 P.2d 731 ]; see City of Huntington Beach v. Board of Administration (1992) 4 Cal.4th 462, 468 [ 14 Cal.Rptr.2d 514 , 841 P.2d 1034 ].) … J., Mosk, J., Kennard, J., Werdegar, J., Chin, J., and Brown, J., concurred.

Blair v. Brownstone Oil & Refining Co.

168 Cal. 632 · California Supreme Court · Oct 13, 1914

The act of the secretary was wholly without any authority on the part of the board of directors of the corporation. … (Fraser v. Sheldon, 164 Cal. 168 , [ 128 Pac. 33 ].)

Pioneer Express Co. v. Riley

208 Cal. 677 · California Supreme Court · Jan 18, 1930

The petitioner protested before said board against its increase in taxes. … (G ould v. Gould, 245 U. S. 151 [ 62 L. Ed. 211 , 38 Sup. Ct. Rep. 53]; Estate of Potter, 188 Cal. 55, 64 [ 204 Pac. 826 ].)

Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth, Inc. v. City of Rancho Cordova

53 Cal. Rptr. 3d 821 · California Supreme Court · Feb 1, 2007

Selmi; Chatten-Brown & Carstens, Jan Chatten-Brown, Santa Monica, and Douglas P. … Factual and Procedural Background The facts are drawn from the record before the County's Board of Supervisors (Board) when that body took the challenged actions. (See Western States Petroleum Assn. v.

People ex rel. McCauley & Tevis v. Brooks

16 Cal. 11 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1860

In Green v. … (See also People v. Morris, 15 Barb. 529 ; People v. Flagg, 16 Id. 503; People v. Edmonds, 19 Id. 468; People v. Stout, 23 Id. 339.)

County of Madera v. Raymond Granite Co.

139 Cal. 128 · California Supreme Court · May 23, 1903

Appellant relies on Geary v. Board of Supervisors, 107 Cal. 530 . … In County of Sutter v.

Bishop v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County

87 Cal. 226 · California Supreme Court · Dec 20, 1890

Upon this proposition, the case of State v. Valliant, 13 S. W. Rep. 398 , seems to be much in point. … In the one case of Mahoney v.

Charles J. Rounds Co. v. Joint Council of Teamsters No. 42

4 Cal. 3d 888 · California Supreme Court · May 24, 1971

(Clogston v. Schiff-Lang Co., Inc., 2 Cal.2d 414, 416 [ 41 P.2d 555 ]; accord, Grunwald-Marx, Inc. v. Los Angeles Joint Board, Amalgamated Clothing Workers (1961) 192 Cal.App.2d 268, 287 [ 13 Cal.Rptr. 446 ].) … Los Angeles Joint Board, Amalgamated Clothing Workers, supra, 192 Cal.App. 2d 268, 287 ; Don daRoza, Inc. v. Northern Cal. etc. Hod Carriers Union, supra, 233 Cal.App.2d 96, 100-101, 103-104 ; Leon Handbag Co. v.

Woods v. Superior Court

28 Cal. 3d 668 · California Supreme Court · Jan 8, 1981

State Personnel Board (1951) 37 Cal.2d 634, 638 [ 234 P.2d 981 ]; see also, Anton v. … (Boren v. State Personnel Board, supra, 37 Cal.2d at p. 637 .)

County of Santa Clara v. Deputy Sheriffs' Ass'n of Santa Clara County, Inc.

3 Cal. 4th 873 · California Supreme Court · Nov 2, 1992

Retirement Board (1954) 42 Cal.2d 795, 798 [ 270 P.2d 12 ]; see also Woods v. … Beck v.

Bowden v. Pierce

73 Cal. 459 · California Supreme Court · Sep 27, 1887

It appears from the findings that Houston, on July 23, 1867, entered into two contracts with the board of state harbor commissioners for the construction of certain sections of the sea-wall; that pn December 8, 1868, said … (Pryor v. Downey, 50 Cal. 400 ; Valencia v. Bernal, 26 Cal. 335 ; Estate of Hamilton, 34 Cal. 468 .) The refusal or neglect to qualify was a disclaimer of the trust. (1 Perry on Trusts, 262.)

People v. McKale

25 Cal. 3d 626 · California Supreme Court · Nov 8, 1979

(See People v. Hill (1977) 66 Cal.App.3d 320 [ 136 Cal.Rptr. 30 ].) In People v. K. … (See Black v. Browne (1940) 39 Cal.App.2d 606 [ 103 P.2d 1012 ].)

Cahen v. Wells

132 Cal. 447 · California Supreme Court · Apr 6, 1901

—This case differs materially from the case of Crowley v. … The finding and decision of *450 the commissioners, or such investigating officer or board, when approved by the commissioners, shall be certified to the appointing officer or board, and shall be forthwith enforced by such

Kincaid v. Reid

142 Cal. 88 · California Supreme Court · Feb 2, 1904

The board of supervisors of said county met and canvassed the returns of said election in said county at the time and as required by law. … (Citing Farnham v. Boland, 134 Cal. 151 ; Salcido v. Roberts, 136 Cal. 670 ; Patterson v. Henley, 136 Cal. 265 , and People v. Campbell, 138 Cal. 11 .) The judgment is affirmed. Angellotti, J., and Shaw, J., concurred.

Vickers v. State Bar

32 Cal. 2d 247 · California Supreme Court · Jul 30, 1948

He relies upon Schneider v. Schneider, 183 Cal. 335 [ 191 P. 533 , 11 A.L.R. 1386 ], and Coats v. … (Herron v. State Bar, 24 Cal.2d 53 [ 147 P.2d 543 ]; McGregor v. State Bar, 24 Cal.2d 283 [ 148 P.2d 865 ]; Prime v. State Bar, 18 Cal.2d 56 [ 112 P.2d 881 ].)

De Aryan v. Akers

12 Cal. 2d 781 · California Supreme Court · Feb 28, 1939

Johnson, 10 Cal. (2d) 758 [ 76 Pac. (2d) 1184 ]; Western Lithograph Co. v. State Board of Equalization, 11 Cal. (2d) 156 [ 78 Pac. (2d) 731 , 117 A. L. R. 838].) … (Western Lithograph Co. v. State Board of Equalization, supra.)

Stein v. State Bar

15 Cal. 2d 668 · California Supreme Court · Jul 18, 1940

He then applied to the board of governors for leave to present additional evidence and for a hearing de novo. … (Kennedy v. State Bar, 13 Cal. (2d) 236 [ 88 Pac. (2d) 920 ].)

Hulland v. State Bar

8 Cal. 3d 440 · California Supreme Court · Dec 7, 1972

(Alkow v. State Bar (1971) 3 Cal.3d 924, 935 [ 92 Cal.Rptr. 278 , 479 P.2d 638 ]; Simmons v. State Bar (1970) 2 Cal.3d 719, 729 [ 87 Cal.Rptr. 368 , 470 P.2d 352 ]; Clancy v. … Procedure (2d ed. 1971) Attorneys, § 202, p. 209; see Bailey v. State Bar (1930) 209 Cal. 476 [ 288 P. 433 ]; Bruns v. State Bar (1941) 18 Cal.2d 667 [ 117 P.2d 327 ]; Sullivan v.

Olguin v. State Bar

28 Cal. 3d 195 · California Supreme Court · Sep 22, 1980

As stated, petitioner urges that the recommendation of the disciplinary board be accepted by this court. In reviewing actions of the State Bar, great weight is given to its disciplinary recommendation. (Innis v. … In Cain v.