Case law

Shelby v. Houston

38 Cal. 410 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1869

Sec. 180; Henry v. Everts, 30 Cal. 426 ; Sears v. Dixon, 33 Id. 326; Morrill v. Chapman, 35 Id. 86; Carpentier v. Small, Id. 355.) … (Dickinson v. Maguirre, 9 Cal. 48 ; Janson v. Brooks and Bachman y. Whitney, 29 Id. 220; Thompson v. Smith, 28 Id. 532.)

People v. Williams

45 Cal. 3d 1268 · California Supreme Court · Jul 11, 1988

Brown (1985) 40 Cal.3d 512, 538-545 [ 220 Cal.Rptr. 637 , 709 P.2d 440 ], reversed on other grounds sub nomine California v. Brown (1987) 479 U.S. 538 [ 93 L.Ed.2d 934 , 107 S.Ct. 837 ]. … (See California v. Brown, supra, 479 U.S. at p. 542 *1323 [ 93 L.Ed.2d at p. 940 , 107 S.Ct. at p. 839 ].)

Esposti v. Rivers Brothers, Inc.

207 Cal. 570 · California Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1929

The following are some of the leading eases upon which the respondents thus rely: Matthews v. Ormerd, 140 Cal. 578 [ 74 Pac. 136 ]; Trusdale v. Dowdle, 47 N. J. Eq. 396 [ 20 Atl. 972 ]; Terminal Bank v. … Supp. 609 ]; Brown v. Jones, 89 Misc. Rep. 536 [ 152 N. Y. Supp. 571 ]; Stein v. Indianapolis Building etc. Assn., 18 Ind. 237 [ 81 Am. Dec. 353 ] ; Essley v. Sloan (Ill.), 6 N. E. 449 ; Key West Wharf & Coal Co. v.

Marsh v. Industrial Accident Commission

217 Cal. 338 · California Supreme Court · Jan 31, 1933

Re Brown, 228 Mass. 31 [ 116 N. E. 897 ] ; Hornbrook-Price Co. v. Stewart, 66 Ind. App. 400 [ 118 N. E. 315 ]; Esposito V. Marlin-Rockwell Corp., 96 Conn. 414 [ 114 Atl. 92 ]. … He thereupon applied on February 7, 1928, for disability compensation, but his claim was rejected by the Board on the ground that it was barred.

In Re Estate of Yturburru

134 Cal. 567 · California Supreme Court · Nov 22, 1901

. • The contention of appellant based on the theory that these hospitals are charitable and eleemosynary institutions, and should not be converted into boarding-houses, finds a ready answer. … As supporting the foregoing views we cite McNairy County v. McCoin, 101 Tenn. 74 ; Simons v. Van Benthuysen, 121 Mich. 697 ; Goodale v. Lawrence, 88 N. Y. 513 , 1 and cases therein cited; Watt v. Smith, 89 Cal. 602 .

Holt Manufacturing Co. v. Collins

154 Cal. 265 · California Supreme Court · Sep 8, 1908

(Church v. Garrison, 75 Cal. 199 , [ 16 Pac. 885 ]; Lambert v. Davis, 116 Cal. 292 , [ 48 Pac. 123 ]. See, also, Clark v. Brown, 141 Cal. 93 , [ 74 Pac. 548 ].) … Brown, 141 Cal. 93 , [ 74 Pac. 548 ], in discussing a question of costs, it was said that he was a necessary party.

Russell v. Williams

58 Cal. 2d 487 · California Supreme Court · Oct 4, 1962

The same ruling has been applied as between a life tenant and a remainderman (Corder v. McDougall (1932) supra, 216 Cal. 773 ; Board of Education v. … (Board of Education v. Winding Gulf Collieries (1945) supra, 152 F.2d 382, 384 [2]; Rogge v. Menard County Mutual Fire Insurance Co. (1960) supra, 184 F.Supp. 289, 294 ; Murray v.

Bellmer v. Blessington

136 Cal. 3 · California Supreme Court · Mar 10, 1902

That it is applicable was held in Misch v. Mayhew, 51 Cal. 514 . That was an election contest. … I think the-point squarely determined by the case cited, which was-affirmed in Hagenmeyer v. Board of Equalization, 82 Cal. 214 ; *5 Landregan v. Peppin, 86 Cal. 126 ; Derby v. Modesto, 104 Cal. 522 ; Bates v.

Warsaw v. Chicago Metallic Ceilings, Inc.

35 Cal. 3d 564 · California Supreme Court · Mar 5, 1984

(See Brown Derby Hollywood Corp. v. Hutton (1964) 61 Cal.2d 855, 859 [ 40 Cal.Rptr. 848 , 395 P.2d 896 ]; Dolske v. Gormley (1962) 58 Cal.2d 513, 521 [ 25 Cal.Rptr. 270 , 375 P.2d 174 ]; Raab v. … (See Brown Derby Hollywood Corp. v. Hatton, supra, 61 Cal.2d at p. 858 ; Dolske v. Gormley, supra, 58 Cal.2d at pp. 520-521; Raab v. Casper, supra, 51 Cal.App.2d at p. 872; Donnell v.

Gomez v. Superior Court

29 Cal. Rptr. 3d 352 · California Supreme Court · Jun 16, 2005

Firszt v. … (See Brown v. Winnwood Amusement Co. (1931) 225 Mo.App. 1180 [ 34 S.W.2d 149, 152 ] [operator of roller coaster held to the degree of care required of common carriers]; Cooper v.

Lamb v. McMullen

157 Cal. 14 · California Supreme Court · Dec 17, 1909

This case is an appeal from a judgment of the superior court in a proceeding in certiorari to review the proceedings of the board of supervisors of Orange County, whereby the Newbert Protection District was organized under … For the reasons given in the opinion in Keech v. Joplin, it should have been taken to the district court of appeal. That court has the appellate jurisdiction in certiorari proceedings.

People v. Symons

54 Cal. 2d 855 · California Supreme Court · Dec 9, 1960

(Bacich v. Board of Control, 23 Cal.2d 343 [ 144 P.2d 818 ]; Rose v. State, supra, 19 Cal.2d 713 ; Eachus v. Los Angeles etc. Ry. Co., supra, 103 Cal. 614, 617 ; Beardon v. … (Bauer v. County of Ventura, 45 Cal.2d 276, 283 [ 289 P.2d 1 ]; Clement v. State Reclamation Board, 35 Cal.2d 628, 637 [ 220 P.2d 897 ].) Yet, the defendants seek to accomplish just that in the instant case.

People v. Park

23 Cal. 138 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1863

But it was afterwards changed by the Board of Equalization so as to read as follows: “ T. W. Park. Money at interest secured by mortgage executed by J. C. … (Holton v. Bangor, 23 Maine, 264; Little v. Greenleaf, 7 Mass. 236 ; Salem Iron Factory v. Danvers, 10 Id. 514; Amesbury Man. Co. v. Amesbury, 17 Id. 461; Preston v. Boston, 12 Pick. 7 ; Lyman v.

Wilde v. City of Dunsmuir

9 Cal. 5th 1105 · California Supreme Court · Aug 3, 2020

(Rossi v. Brown (1995) 9 Cal.4th 688, 698 & fn. 4 (Rossi); Geiger v. Board of Supervisors (1957) 48 Cal.2d 832, 836–837 (Geiger); 2  WILDE v. … The initiative would have repealed and replaced a county board of supervisors’ selection of a site for local courthouses. (Id. at pp. 127, 135.)

Germania Building & Loan Ass'n v. Wagner

61 Cal. 349 · California Supreme Court · Aug 29, 1882

In the case of Crean v. … To the same effect in the Thompson Case, 2 Brown’s (Pa.) Rep. 297. We also find the same doctrine laid down in the very recent work of Knecland on Mechanics’ Liens, Section 151.

Smith v. Davis

30 Cal. 536 · California Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1866

(Sedgwick on Statutes, 319 ; Benslcy v. Mountain Lake Water Company, 13 Cal. 306 ; Curran v. Shattuck, 24 Cal. 427 ; Stanford v. Worn, 27 Cal. 171 .) … (Kelsey v. Abbott, 13 Cal. 618 ; Moss v. Shear, 25 Cal. 45 .) We are aware that a. different result was reached in Conlin v. Seamen, 22 Cal. 549 .

People v. McKinnon

52 Cal. 4th 610 · California Supreme Court · Aug 22, 2011

On the night Coder was murdered, Brown 10 and several others, including Nona Woodson and Melva Murray, were in Brown’s room at the Desert Edge Motel. Brown heard one shot fired. … (See People v. Brown (2004) 33 Cal.4th 382, 393 [ 15 Cal.Rptr.3d 624 , 93 P.3d 244 ] (Brown), citing People v. Ortiz (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 104, 119, fn. 7 [ 134 Cal.Rptr.2d 467 ].) No basis for reversal appears. F.

Wallis v. State Bar

21 Cal. 2d 322 · California Supreme Court · Dec 2, 1942

(Lantz v. State Bar, 212 Cal. 213 [ 298 P. 497 ]; Matter of Coffey, 123 Cal. 522 [ 56 P. 448 ].) … The State Bar relies upon In re Soale, 31 Cal.App. 144 [ 159 P. 1065 ], and Lantz v. State Bar, supra, as justifying its recommendation for suspension.

Fox v. Industrial Accident Commission

194 Cal. 173 · California Supreme Court · Jul 29, 1924

A. 941, 70 Pac. 21 ], and Shebley v. Peters, 53 Cal. App. 288 -293 [ 200 Pac. 364 ]. Sinnerton v. Robert Addie, 13 B. W. C. C. 500, and Spreckels v. Industrial Acc. … Co. v. Rowland, 170 Wis. 293 [7 A. L. R 1071, 174 N. W. 899 ]; Northwestern Iron Co. v. Industrial Com., 154 Wis. 97 [Ann. Cas. 1915B, 877, L. R. A. 1916A, 366, 142 N. W. 271 ].)

Harrington v. Tibbet

143 Cal. 78 · California Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1904

(Stocking v. Howard, 73 Mo. 27 .) … (See Shaul v. Brown, 28 Iowa, 37 ; 1 Potter v. Gjertsen, 37 Minn. 386 ; Kline *82 v. Shuler, 30 N. C. 484 1 ; Ward v. Sutor, 70 Tex. 343 ; 2 Dennis v. Ryan, 65 N. Y. 385 ; 3 Bell v. Keepers, 37 Kan. 64 ; Streight v.