Case law

Keaton v. Mun. Court of L.A.

209 Cal. 52 · California Supreme Court · Feb 21, 1930

Respondent contends that the Hansen case was erroneously decided and in support of its contention cites the following decisions of this court: Hill v. Finnigan, 54 Cal. 311 ; Brown v. … Plummer, 70 Cal. 337 [ 11 Pac. 631 ] ; Tompkins v. Montgomery, 116 Cal. 120 [ 47 Pac. 1006 ] ; People v. Bank of San Luis Obispo, 152 Cal. 261 [ 92 Pac. 481 ].

County of San Mateo v. Maloney

71 Cal. 205 · California Supreme Court · Oct 9, 1886

The assessment was not subject to be reduced by the board of equalization. … (Gaines v. Thompson, 7 Wall. 347 .) As was said in Porter v.

Levitzky v. Canning

33 Cal. 299 · California Supreme Court · Oct 5, 1867

VI, Sec. 17; Miller v. Stewart, 24 Cal. 504 ; People v. … (Seaman v. Browning, 1 Leon. 157.)

Abraham v. State Bar

17 Cal. 2d 625 · California Supreme Court · Mar 17, 1941

This is a proceeding to review the recommendation of the Board of Governors of the State Bar that the petitioner be suspended from the practice of law for a period of thirty days. … The Board of Governors recommended suspension for a period of thirty days. *627 In support of the recommendation of the Board of Governors, the attorney for the State Bar relies on the decision of this court in Hill v.

Gosewisch v. Doran

161 Cal. 511 · California Supreme Court · Dec 9, 1911

(Hoar v. Wood, 3 Met. 193 ; McLaughlin v. Cowley, 127 Mass. 316 ; Moore v. Manufacturers’ Nat. Bank, 123 N. Y. 420 , [11 L. R. A. 753, 25 N. E. 1048 ]; Wilson v. Sullivan, 81 Ga. 238 , [ 7 S. E. 274 ]; Ash v. … E. 1048 ]; Wilson v. Sullivan, 81 Ga. 238 , [ 7 S. E. 274 ]; Hartung v. Shaw, 130 Mich 177 , [ 89 N. W. 701 ]; Bartlett v.

Wilson v. Brannan

27 Cal. 258 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1865

The same doctrine is laid down in Brown v. Bement, 8 John. 96 ; in Ackley v. Finch, 7 Cow. 292 ; in Case v. Boughton, 11 Wend. 109 ; in Patchin v. Pierce, 12 Wend. 61; in Smith v. … The same doctrine in substance was held by the Supreme Court of Missouri in Williams v. Roger, 7 Mo. 556 , and in Robinson v. Campbell, 8 Mo. 366 , 615; by the Supreme Court of Alabama in Brown v.

Welsh v. Bardshar

137 Cal. 154 · California Supreme Court · Aug 7, 1902

(Gilman v. Cosgrove, 22 Cal. 358 ; Pfister v. Wade, 69 Cal. 133 ; Schneider v. Brown, 85 Cal. 206 .)

Frenna v. Sunnyside Land Co.

124 Cal. 437 · California Supreme Court · May 18, 1899

Hpon the authority of Ryan v. Altschul, 103 Cal. 174 , and Rauer v. … In Rauer v.

Complete Service Bureau v. San Diego County Medical Society

43 Cal. 2d 201 · California Supreme Court · Jul 9, 1954

Co. v. … (See Accounting Corp. v. State Board of Accountancy, 34 Cal.2d 186 [ 208 P.2d 984 ].) In Maloney v.

People v. Stewart

211 Cal. 79 · California Supreme Court · Nov 26, 1930

. \ The appeal of the other five defendants was denied on April 30, 1929, and discussion of that cause is found in People v. … Brown, 207 Cal. 172 [ 277 Pac. 320 ], The crime of which these defendants were convicted was murder growing out of an armed prison revolt which occurred at Folsom on Thanksgiving Day (November 24), 1927.

Johnston v. City of Claremont

49 Cal. 2d 826 · California Supreme Court · Mar 26, 1958

A board of supervisors in granting a permit under a zoning ordinance acts in an administrative capacity. (Johnston v. Board of Supervisors, 31 Cal.2d 66, 74 [6] [ 187 P.2d 686 ]; Essick v. … (See Johnston v. Board of Supervisors, supra; Essick v. City of Los Angeles, supra.)

City and County of San Francisco v. Sweet

12 Cal. 4th 105 · California Supreme Court · Dec 18, 1995

After D’Amico v. Board of Medical Examiners, supra, 11 Cal.3d 1 , however, this court extended equitable apportionment of attorney fees to some third party suits in which no common fund was created. In Quinn v. … (See, e.g., Baugness v. Paine (1978) 22 Cal.3d 626, 636 [ 150 Cal.Rptr. 461 , 586 P.2d 942 ]; D’Amico v. Board of Medical Examiners, supra, 11 Cal.3d 1, 27 .)

McQuiddy v. Worswick Street Paving Co.

160 Cal. 9 · California Supreme Court · May 26, 1911

added only for the purpose of emphasizing the importance of limiting more carefully than has been done in some of the cases followed by the superior court, the application of the principle established by the decision in Brown … v.

Ferreira v. Ferreira

9 Cal. 3d 824 · California Supreme Court · Jul 30, 1973

(In re Walker (1964) 228 Cal.App.2d 217, 223 [39 Cal. *834 Rptr. 243].) 7 An across-the-board application of that principle, however, would, compel California courts to reexamine foreign decrees on the merits in all cases … Wene (1966) supra, 240 Cal.App.2d 670, 678 ; Moniz v. Moniz (1956) 142 Cal.App.2d 527, 531 [ 298 P.2d 710 ]; Brown v. Brown (1951) 104 Cal.App.2d 88, 93 [ 230 P.2d 651 ]).

People v. Mendoza Tello

15 Cal. 4th 264 · California Supreme Court · Apr 17, 1997

(People v. Wilson, supra, at p. 936 ; People v. Pope, supra, at p. 426 .) … J„ Mosk, J., Kennard, J., Baxter, J., Werdegar, J., and Brown, J., concurred. A petition for a rehearing was denied June 11, 1997, and the opinion was modified to read as printed above.

Winbigler v. Mayor of Los Angeles

45 Cal. 36 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1872

Under the Acts organizing counties, Boards of Supervisors and Road Overseers are charged with the duty of keeping public highways in repair, and it was held here, in Hoffman v. … San Joaquin County, 21 Cal. 426 , and Crowell v.

Warren v. McGill

103 Cal. 153 · California Supreme Court · Jun 18, 1894

See Davis v. Browning, 91 Cal. 603 , where the same point was raised, and decided against the contention of appellant here. 3.

Nicolson Pavement Co. v. Fay

35 Cal. 695 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1868

against Painter, decided at the present term, (post,) lies in the fact that in addition to the cause of action for putting down Nieolson pavement, the complaint contains also a cause of action for other work for which the Board … There is nothing in the ease of Beaudry v. Valdez, 32 Cal. 269 , which is counter to this view.

People v. Bollinger

196 Cal. 191 · California Supreme Court · May 26, 1925

In People v. … Jones, 63 Cal. 168 , and in People v.

Sabichi v. Aguilar

43 Cal. 285 · California Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1872

(Johnson v. Van Dyke, 20 Cal. 225 ; Davis v. Davis, 26 Cal. 46 ; Beach v. Gabriel, 29 Cal. 580 .) … In Mahoney v.