Case law

Bank of Escondido v. Thomas

5 Cal. Unrep. 94 · California Supreme Court · Jul 25, 1895

I think this was while the board was in session. I am not positive there was any motion, but it was the tenor of the conversation, and I understood it *98 was agreed to on that basis.” … And, in support of this view, see Zeininger v. Schnitzler, 48 Kan. 63, 65 , 28 Pac. 1007 . 3. There is another ground on which the judgment should be affirmed. It was held in Guttenberger v.

In Re Bloom

44 Cal. 3d 128 · California Supreme Court · Nov 30, 1987

When the leased airplane arrived in Houston, the pails of explosives were loaded on board. … While we independently determine the facts (Alberton v.

County of Los Angeles v. Jones

13 Cal. 2d 554 · California Supreme Court · May 22, 1939

“The board of supervisors of the county of Los Angeles instituted the original proceedings in each instance. … (East Bay Municipal Utility Dist. v. Garrison, 191 Cal. 680, 688 [ 218 Pac. 43 ] ; Mulvill v. City of San Diego, 183 Cal. 734 [ 192 Pac. 702 ]; Merced County v. Helm, 102 Cal. 159 [ 36 Pac. 399 ] ; Creighton v.

Ebbert v. Mercantile Trust Co.

213 Cal. 496 · California Supreme Court · Aug 27, 1931

Code, see. 1670; SunMaid Raisin Growers v. Mosesian, 90 Cal. App. 1 [ 265 Pac. 828 ]; Leslie v. Brown Bros., 208 Cal. 606 [ 283 Pac. 936 ]; see Arndt, Liquidated Damages in California, 10 Cal. L. Rev. 8 .) … Glock v. Howard, 123 Cal. 1 [ 69 Am. St. Rep. 17 , 43 L. R. A. 199, 55 Pac. 713 ], upon which plaintiffs place great reliance, is not controlling.

People v. Denomme

6 Cal. Unrep. 227 · California Supreme Court · Jan 30, 1899

In Sullivan v. Royer, 72 Cal. 248 , 1 Am. St. … In People v. Wheeler, 60 Cal. 581 , 44 Am. Rep. 70 , it was held error to allow the district attorney to read from “Browne’s Medical Jurisprudence of Insanity,” against the objection of defendant.

Salcido v. Roberts

136 Cal. 670 · California Supreme Court · Jun 25, 1902

Upon a canvass of the returns the board of supervisors found that the appellant had received 252 and the respondent 250 votes for the office of supervisor of San Andreas Township, Calaveras County, and issued their election … (Farnham v. Boland, 134 Cal. 151 ; Patterson v. Hanley, 136 Cal. 265 .) Neither did the court err in rejecting ballots No. 41 and No. 82, upon each of which the cross was stamped!

Wilson v. Parker, Covert & Chidester

123 Cal. Rptr. 2d 19 · California Supreme Court · Aug 1, 2002

BROWN, J., Concurring. Although I concur with most of the majority’s reasoning, I write separately because I find its distinction of Crowley v. … According to the majority, “[w]e did not, in Crowley , indicate whether we approved the result in Lucchesi [v.

People v. Price

1 Cal. 4th 324 · California Supreme Court · Dec 30, 1991

(See People v. Bonin (1988) 46 Cal.3d 659, 689 [ 250 Cal.Rptr. 687 , 758 P.2d 1217 .) The first claimed instance occurred during the testimony of prosecution investigator Barry Brown. … (People v. Brown (1988) 46 Cal.3d 432, 448 [ 250 Cal.Rptr. 604 , 758 P.2d 1135 ].)

Crittenden v. Superior Court

61 Cal. 2d 565 · California Supreme Court · Jul 16, 1964

Superior Court (1959) 53 Cal.2d 236 [ 1 Cal.Rptr. 158 , 347 P.2d 294 ], we issued a writ of prohibition to restrain the superior court from preventing the board of permit appeals from granting a building permit. … (E.g., McKay Jewelers, Inc. v. Bowron (1942) 19 Cal.2d 595 [ 122 P.2d 543 , 139 A.L.R. 1188 ]; Guillory v. Godfrey (1955) 134 Cal.App.2d 628 [ 286 P.2d 474 ]; see Uptown Enterprises v.

Decker v. Occidental Life Insurance

70 Cal. 2d 842 · California Supreme Court · Apr 18, 1969

She cites Vai v. … (Anders v. State Board of Equalization, 82 Cal.App.2d 88, 98 [ 185 P.2d 883 ].)

Rideaux v. Torgrimson

12 Cal. 2d 633 · California Supreme Court · Jan 26, 1939

(Brown v. Superior Court, 13 Cal. App. (2d) 693 [ 57 Pac. (2d) 965 ]; Spitzer v. Superior Court, 74 Cal. App. 494 [ 241 Pac. 270 ].) Such defense is waived if not raised either by the pleadings or the evidence. … (Reidy v. Superior Court, 220 Cal. 111 [ 29 Pac. (2d) 780 ]; United Security Bank & Trust Co. v. Superior Court, 205 Cal. 167 [ 270 Pac. 184 ]; Baird v. Superior Court, 204 Cal. 408 [ 268 Pac. 640 ].)

Pearson Dental Supplies, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County

48 Cal. 4th 665 · California Supreme Court · Apr 26, 2010

(Aguilar v. … (See generally Little v. Auto Stiegler, Inc., supra, 29 Cal.4th at pp. 1089-1095 (cone. & dis. opn. of Brown, J.)

Parsons v. Superior Court

58 Cal. Rptr. 3d 48 · California Supreme Court · Jan 3, 2007

(See Greener v. Workers' Comp. … Workers' Compensation Appeals Board supra, 6 Cal.4th 1028, 1036 , 25 Cal.Rptr.2d 539 , 863 P.2d 784 .

Heinlen v. Phillips

88 Cal. 557 · California Supreme Court · Apr 2, 1891

We look into the case no further than may be necessary to *559 ascertain whether it is a-case in which the inferior tribunal, board, or office from which it comes had jurisdiction, and if not, whether there is any other plain … This case was approved and followed in Morley v. Elkins, 37 Cal. 456 , and Palache v. Hunt, 64 Cal. 474 .

California Motor Transport Co. v. Public Utilities Commission

59 Cal. 2d 270 · California Supreme Court · Mar 7, 1963

(Braniff Airways, Inc. v. Civil Aeronautics Board, 306 F.2d 739, 742-743 ; WLOX Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Com., 260 F.2d 712, 718 ; Saginaw Broadcasting Co. v. … (Southern California Freight Lines v. Public Utilities Com., 35 Cal.2d 586, 592-593 [ 220 P.2d 393 ]; cf. Martin v. Alcoholic Beverage etc. Appeals Board, 52 Cal.2d 259, 264-265 [ 341 P.2d 291 ]; *274 Southern Pac.

Usher v. Henkel

205 Cal. 413 · California Supreme Court · Oct 30, 1928

Brush are the surviving members of the last board of directors of the said Southern Land Company.” … In the case of Ransome-Crummey Co. v.

Withers v. Massengill

148 Cal. 769 · California Supreme Court · Mar 14, 1906

(Driscoll v. Market St. Cable R. Co., 97 Cal. 563 , [ 32 Pac. 591 , 33 Am. St. Rep. 203 ]; Field v. Shorb, 99 Cal. 666 , [ 34 Pac. 504 ].) … Brown and myself to take $75 per month rent for one year provided you did not sell it, which you would know about in one week, and let me know,” etc.

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.

Le Francois v. Goel

35 Cal. 4th 1094 · California Supreme Court · Jun 9, 2005

(See Weil & Brown, Cal. Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial, supra, § 9:327.8, p. 9(1)-107.) … J., Baxter, J., Werdegar, J., Brown, J., and Moreno, J., concurred. All further statutory citations are to the Code of Civil Procedure.

Lacrabere v. Wise

7 Cal. Unrep. 107 · California Supreme Court · Jan 3, 1903

As said in Ivory v. Brown (opinion filed November 17, 1902), 137 Cal. 603 , 70 Pac. 657 : “The defendants neither paid rent, nor heeded the notice, but remained in possession. The action was commenced May 11, 1900.