Case law

Hamer v. Town of Ross

59 Cal. 2d 776 · California Supreme Court · Jun 13, 1963

This latter test has, indeed, been expressed in an unbroken array of decisions from Zahn v. Board of Public Works (1925) 195 Cal. 497 [ 234 P. 388 ] through Consolidated Rock Products Co. v. … (Miller v. Board of Public Works (1925) 195 Cal. 477, 495 [ 234 P. 381 , 38 A.L.R. 1479 ].)

Crocker-Woolworth National Bank v. Carle

133 Cal. 409 · California Supreme Court · Jul 24, 1901

(Landis v. Woodman, 126 Cal. 454 .) … The completion of the contract was referred to merely as fixing the time. (1 Daniel on Negotiable Instruments, secs. 44,88; Cota v. Buck, 7 Met. 588 . 1 ) The note involved in Chandler v.

County of Los Angeles v. Superior Court

17 Cal. 2d 707 · California Supreme Court · Apr 16, 1941

Board of Police Commrs., 188 Cal. 525 [ 206 Pac. 70 ]; Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Jordan, 168 Cal. 270 [ 142 Pac. 839 ]; Craig v. Boone, 146 Cal. 718 [ 81 Pac. 22 ]; Spencer v. … (Spencer v. City of Los Angeles, supra, at page 117; Craig v. Boone, supra.)

Rosasco v. County of Tuolumne

143 Cal. 430 · California Supreme Court · Jun 2, 1904

In Ford v. … In State v.

People v. Moran

144 Cal. 48 · California Supreme Court · Jul 2, 1904

Counsel cites a number of cases, including People v. Stevens, 68 Cal. 114 ; People v. Creegan, 121 Cal. 560 , and Hicks v. United States, 150 U. … Counsel cites People v. Irwin, 77 Cal. 502 ; People v. Lee Dick Lung, 129 Cal. 491 ; People v.

Colburn Biological Institute v. Shaffer

12 Cal. 2d 168 · California Supreme Court · Sep 21, 1938

Fannie Shaffer constituted the board of trustees of the institute. (Colburn Biological Institute v. DeBolt, 6 Cal. (2d) 631 [ 59 Pac. (2d) 108 ].) … (Inyo Chemical Co. v. City of Los Angeles, 5 Cal. (2d) 525 [ 55 Pac. (2d) 850 ]; Southern Pac. Co. v. City of Los Angeles, 5 Cal. (2d) 545, 548 [ 55 Pac. (2d) 847 ].)

Othmer v. City Council of Long Beach

207 Cal. 263 · California Supreme Court · May 16, 1929

(See Conn v. City Council, 17 Cal. App. 705 [ 121 Pac. 714, 719 ]; Koehler v. Board of Trustees, 83 Cal. App. 648 [ 257 Pac. 187 ].) … (See Ratto v. Board of Trustees, 75 Cal. App. 724, 727 [ 243 Pac. 466 ].) Let the peremptory writ issue as prayed. Curtis, J., Langdon, J., Preston, J., and Richards, J., concurred.

Holabird v. Richardson

3 Cal. 2d 299 · California Supreme Court · Apr 19, 1935

(Dodge v. Woolsey, 18 How. 331, 341 [ 15 L. Ed. 401 ].) … (Hawes v. Oakland, 104 U. S. 450 [ 26 L. Ed. 827 ].)

People v. Chi Ko Wong

18 Cal. 3d 698 · California Supreme Court · Dec 29, 1976

(See People v. Browning, supra, 45 Cal.App.3d 125, 141 .) … (People v. Allgood, supra, 54 Cal.App.3d 434 .) People v. Joe T, supra, 48 Cal.App.3d 114 , People v. Brown, supra, 13 Cal.App.3d 876 and People v. Arauz, supra, 5 Cal.App.3d 523 are disapproved, and People v.

Tompkins v. Superior Court

59 Cal. 2d 65 · California Supreme Court · Jan 29, 1963

(People v. Brown, 45 Cal.2d 640, 643-645 [ 290 P.2d 528 ], and cases cited.) … (See Verdier v. Verdier, 152 Cal.App.2d 348, 352-353 [ 313 P.2d 123 ]; People v. Weaver, 241 Mich. 616 [ 217 N.W. 797, 799 , 58 A.L.R. 733 ] ; United States v. Blok, 188 F.2d 1019, 1021 ; Holzhey v.

Potvin v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.

95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 496 · California Supreme Court · May 8, 2000

BROWN, J. I dissent. … Baxter, J., Chin, J., and Brown, J., were of the opinion that the petition should be granted.

Western Indemnity Co. v. Pillsbury

170 Cal. 686 · California Supreme Court · Aug 4, 1915

Sections 3 to 11 provide for the appointment and organization of a board of three members, to be known as the Industrial Accident Commission, and declare the general powers of the board. … Sections 81 to 83 provide for the authority of the board to grant rehearings.

In Re Hawthorne

24 Cal. Rptr. 3d 189 · California Supreme Court · Feb 10, 2005

As the majority opinion explains (maj. opn., ante, at p. 47), section 1376’s standard is derived from Atkins v. Virginia (2002) 536 U.S. 304 [ 153 L.Ed.2d 335 , 122 S.Ct. 2242 ] (Atkins). … Brown, J., did not participate therein.

HLC Properties, Ltd. v. Superior Court

24 Cal. Rptr. 3d 199 · California Supreme Court · Feb 14, 2005

Smith v. … J., Kennard, L, Werdegar, J., Chin, J., Brown, J., and Moreno, J., concurred.

Kruger v. California Highway Indemnity Exchange

201 Cal. 672 · California Supreme Court · Jul 27, 1927

Jur., pp. 996, 997; Easton v. Boston Investment Co., 51 Cal. App. 246, 251 [ 196 Pac. 796 ]; Irwin v. Backus, 25 Cal. 214 ; Pico v. Webster, 14 Cal. 202, 204 [ 73 Am. Dec. 647 ].) … We also find in the case of Pioneer Sav. & Loan Co. v. Bartsch, 51 Minn. 474 [ 38 Am. St. Rep. 511 , 53 N.

Colberg, Inc. v. State of California Ex Rel. Dept. Pub. Wks.

67 Cal. 2d 408 · California Supreme Court · Oct 3, 1967

Board of State Harbor Comrs. v. Potrero & Bay View R.R. … County of Los Angeles, supra ; Bacich v. Board of Control, supra . The Colberg and Stephens shipyards are situated on a natural cul-de-sac.

People v. Fewkes

214 Cal. 142 · California Supreme Court · Oct 24, 1931

Merrill and Davidson would be elected to the board of directors in the place and stead of two of the directors named in the articles of incorporation, with Davidson continuing as the third person named in the original board … (See People v. Myers, 206 Cal. 480 [ 275 Pac. 219 ]; People v. Plum, 88 Cal. App. 575 [ 263 Pac. 862 , 265 Pac. 322 ]; People v. Giron, 94 Cal. App. 53 [ 270 Pac. 462 ].)

Thorp v. Randazzo

41 Cal. 2d 770 · California Supreme Court · Dec 16, 1953

(Shaw v. … Board of Administration, supra, p. 776 ; also Estate of Crane, 6 Cal.2d 218, 221 [ 57 P.2d 476 , 104 A.L.R. 1101 ]), but each case must be decided upon its own facts. (Miller v. Miller, supra, p. 790 .)

Strauss v. Superior Court

36 Cal. 2d 396 · California Supreme Court · Dec 6, 1950

(Demaree v. Superior Court, 10 Cal.2d 99 [ 73 P.2d 605 ]; McClatchy Newspapers v. Superior Court, 26 Cal.2d 386 [ 159 P.2d 944 ]; Brown v. Superior Court, 34 Cal.2d 559 [ 212 P.2d 878 ].) … . §71(2), p. 106; McGeary v. Brown, 23 S.D. 573 [ 122 N.W. 605, 607-608 ]; Wood v. Honeyman, 178 Ore. 484 [ 169 P.2d 131,162-163 , 171 A.L.R. 587 ].)

People v. Fields

13 Cal. 4th 289 · California Supreme Court · May 2, 1996

The double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, made applicable to the states through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (Benton v. … (Brown v. Ohio (1977) 432 U.S. 161, 164-169 [ 53 L.Ed.2d 187, 193-196 , 97 S.Ct. 2221 ].)