Case law

Parrott v. Byers

40 Cal. 614 · California Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1871

Turnpike Company v. Van Ness, (2 Cranch. C. C. R.) . … Tbe principle decided in these cases was affirmed in Naglee v. Pacific Wharf Company, ( 20 Cal. 529 ;) and Mead v. Elmore, decided at tbe July Term, 1868, but not reported.

People v. Emiliano M.

3 Cal. Rptr. 3d 140 · California Supreme Court · Aug 7, 2003

J., Kennard, J., Werdegar, J., Chin, J., Brown, J., and Moreno, J., concurred. 1 All unlabeled statutory references are to the Welfare and Institutions Code. 2 Penal Code section 186.30 provides, in part, as follows: “(a) … The court may admit and consider reliable hearsay evidence at the hearing to the same extent that such evidence would be admissible in an adult probation revocation hearing, pursuant to the decision in People v.

Mott v. Smith

16 Cal. 533 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1860

John v. … (Rhoades, lessee, v. Selin, 4 Wash. C. C. R. 718; Willinks, lessee, v. Miles, 1 Pet. C. C. R. 429; Morris v. Wadsworth, 17 Wend. 103, 112, 113 .)

HESLEP v. City of Sacramento

2 Cal. 580 · California Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1852

during the recent difficulties, and as a testimony of our high appreciation of the manner in which he has discharged his duties as Chief Magistrate of this city, an appropriation of ten thousand dollars be made by this board … (Smith v. Ware, 13 Johns.) If it should be contended that this appropriation was a gratuity or gift, the argument is answered by the fact, that there is no delivery or acceptance. Judgment affirmed.

San Francisco Fire Fighters Local 798 v. City & County of San Francisco

42 Cal. Rptr. 3d 868 · California Supreme Court · May 18, 2006

As was stated in Almassy v. L.A. … The Charter thus provides a rule of impasse resolution that differs from that generally provided to local government employees through the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act. (Gov. Code, § 3500 et seq.)

Jacob v. Carter

4 Cal. Unrep. 543 · California Supreme Court · Mar 26, 1894

and above said salary; and that it was understood and agreed, at the date of said written agreement, that plaintiff' should credit said salary and all other indebtedness of plaintiff to defendant for money paid and for board … Under this answer defendant was entitled to prove any facts showing that plaintiff had no right of entry or possession at the time the action was commenced (Semple v. Cook, 50 Cal. 29 ; Roberts v.

Legislature v. Reinecke

7 Cal. 3d 92 · California Supreme Court · May 10, 1972

(Legislature v. Reinecke (1972) 6 Cal.3d 595, 604 [ 99 Cal.Rptr. 481 , 492 P.2d 385 ].)

In Re Jerald C.

36 Cal. 3d 1 · California Supreme Court · Apr 20, 1984

Selby Brown, Jr., and Donald L. Clark, County Counsel, Ann Miller Ravel, Acting County Counsel, Debra L. Cauble and Thomas Wm. Cain, Deputy County Counsel, for Plaintiff and Respondent. Donald L. … Rptr. 329 , 400 P.2d 321 , 20 A.L.R.3d 361 )]; see Myles Salt Co. v. Board of Com. (1916) 239 U.S. 478, 484-485 [ 60 L.Ed. 392, 396 , 36 S.Ct. 204 ]; Norwood v.

County of Los Angeles v. Morrison

15 Cal. 2d 368 · California Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1940

Without success as far as an evasion or a reduction of such tax was concerned, the executor protested the imposition of the penalty before the Los Angeles board of supervisors sitting as a board of equalization. … Jur., sec. 155, p. 172; Woolridge v. Boardman, 115 Cal. 74 [ 46 Pac. 868 ] ; Clunie v. Siebe, 112 Cal. 593 [ 44 Pac. 1064 ] ; San Jose etc. R. R. Co. v. Mayne, 83 Cal. 566 [ 23 Pac. 522 ].)

Barry v. State Bar of Cal.

212 Cal. Rptr. 3d 124 · California Supreme Court · Jan 5, 2017

(Fairbanks v. … (Brown v. Desert Christian Center (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 733.)

In Re Estate of Hubbell

216 Cal. 574 · California Supreme Court · Oct 24, 1932

(County of San Bernardino v. County of Riverside, 135 Cal. 618, 620 [ 67 Pac. 1047 ] ; Estate of Shaver, 131 Cal. 219, 221 [ 63 Pac. 340 ]; Storke v. … (Kent v. Durham, 106 Mass. 586, 590 ; In re Payne’s Will, 171 Wis. 608 [10 A. L. R. 993, 177 N. W. 858, 859 ]; Esmond v. Brown, 18 R. I. 48 [ 25 Atl. 652, 653 ].)

Pierce v. Whiting

63 Cal. 538 · California Supreme Court · Jun 16, 1883

According to the authority of Browning v. … [People v. Buster, 11 Cal. 215 ; People v. Breyfogle, 17 Cal. 504 ; Tarpey v. Shillinberger, 10 Cal. 391 ; Smith v. United States, 2 Wall. 234 ; Miller v. Stewart, 9 Wheat. 703 .)

People v. Black

32 Cal. 3d 1 · California Supreme Court · Jul 29, 1982

(Select Base Materials v. Board of Equalization (1959) 51 Cal.2d 640, 645 [ 335 P.2d 672 ].) In determining such intent “[t]he court turns first to the words themselves for the answer.” (People v. … (Select Base Materials v. Board of Equalization, supra, 51 Cal.2d at p. 645 .) “[A] construction making some words surplusage is to be avoided.” (Watkins v.

In Re Wells

35 Cal. 2d 889 · California Supreme Court · Sep 13, 1950

(See Howard v. Kentucky (1906), supra, p. 176 of 200 U.S.; State v. … In People v.

Moody v. Industrial Accident Commission

204 Cal. 668 · California Supreme Court · Aug 4, 1928

(Brown v. Industrial Acc. Com., 174 Cal. 457, 460 [ 163 Pac. 664 ]; Green v. Soule, 145 Cal. 96, 99 [ 78 Pac. 337 ]; Barton v. Studebaker Corp., 45 Cal. App. 707 [ 189 Pac. 1025 ]; North Bend Lumber Co. v. Chicago etc. … (Railway Co. v. Artist, 9 C. C. A. 14 , 60 Fed. 365 [23 L. R. A. 581].)”

Key System Transit Lines v. Superior Court

36 Cal. 2d 184 · California Supreme Court · Oct 18, 1950

(Bastajian v. Brown, 19 Cal.2d 209, 214-216 [ 120 P. 2d 9 ] ; Carpenter v. Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co., 14 Cal.2d 704, 708-710 [ 96 P.2d 796 ]; Estate of Goldberg, 10 Cal.2d 709, 713-716 [ 76 P.2d 508 ]; Carter v. J. W. … (Phillips v. Trusheim, 25 Cal.2d 913, 916 [ 156 P.2d 25 ]; Bastajian v. Brown, 19 Cal.2d 209, 214-216 [ 120 P.2d 9 ]; Estate of Burnett, 11 Cal.2d 259, 262 [ 79 P.2d 89 ]; Stevens v.

Allied Compensation Insurance v. Industrial Accident Commission

57 Cal. 2d 115 · California Supreme Court · Dec 22, 1961

(a) ; Cooper v. State Board of Medical Examiners, 35 Cal.2d 242, 246 [ 217 P.2d 630 , 18 A.L.R.2d 593 ] ; Hohreiter v. Garrison, 81 Cal.App.2d 384, 399 [ 184 P.2d 323 ].) … State Board of Medical Examiners, supra, p. 246 ; Morgan v. United States, supra, pp. 480-482 ; McGraw Electric Co. v. United States (E.D. Mo.), 120 F.Supp. 354, 358 , affd. 348 U.

Hutton v. Ormando

3 Cal. 2d 305 · California Supreme Court · Apr 19, 1935

The defendant relies on Storrow v. Green, 39 Cal. App. 123 [ 178 Pac. 339 ], Tarpey v. Veith, 22 Cal. App. 289 [ 134 Pac. 367 ], Pinheiro v. Bettencourt, 17 Cal. App. 111 [ 118 Pac. 941 ], Crosier v. Brown, 66 W. … (People v. Greer, 6 Penne. (Del.) 220 [ 65 Atl. 767 ] ; Harding v. Cowgar, 127 Ind. 245 [ 26 N. E. 799 ].)

People v. Taylor

52 Cal. 3d 719 · California Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1990

(See People v. Brown, supra, 46 Cal.3d at p. 448.) 15. … (People v. Brown, supra, 46 Cal.3d at p. 448.) 21.

Reichert v. General Insurance of America

68 Cal. 2d 822 · California Supreme Court · Jul 3, 1968

The same rule as to accrual of the cause of action was applied in Brown v. Guarantee Ins. Co., 155 Cal. App.2d 679, 690 [ 319 P.2d 69 ], which also involved an insurer’s refusal to settle within the policy limits. … (Board of County Comrs. of County of Logan v. Morris, 147 Colo. 1 [ 362 P.2d 202, 205 ] ; Brimm v. Cache Valley Banking Co., 2 Utah 2d 93 [ 269 P.2d 859, 863-864 ] ; Zimmerman v.