Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

Filterscal

10,000+ results

1.72s

  • Elk Hills Power v. Board of Equalization

    57 Cal. 4th 593 · California Supreme Court · Aug 12, 2013

    Co. v. … (Board of Regents v.

    Cited 68 timesPublished
  • Holland v. Assessment Appeals Board No. 1

    58 Cal. 4th 482 · California Supreme Court · Jan 23, 2014

    (People v. … [Citations.]’ ” (Horwich v. Superior Court (1999) 21 Cal.4th 272, 276 [ 87 Cal.Rptr.2d 222 , 980 P.2d 927 ].) The text of section 62.1(b) offers little support for the Appeal Board’s interpretation.

    Cited 37 timesPublished
  • Voss v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

    10 Cal. 3d 583 · California Supreme Court · Jan 2, 1974

    In Zeeb v. Workmen’s Comp. App. … (Zeeb v. Workmen’s Comp. App.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Board of Directors v. Superior Court

    58 Cal. 2d 599 · California Supreme Court · Oct 24, 1962

    The board’s position is that, under the bylaws of the hospital, only members of the medical staff may treat patients in the hospital, that Dr.Rosner is not a member, and that therefore the board cannot be compelled to permit … In Rosner v. Eden Township Hospital Dist., ante, p. 592 [ 25 Cal.Rptr. 551 , 375 P.2d 431 ], this day filed, it was concluded that the board must admit Dr. Rosner to membership on its staff.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Wilson v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

    16 Cal. 3d 181 · California Supreme Court · Feb 13, 1976

    In Hinojosa v. Workmen’s Comp. … Co. v. Bayside L. Co. (1920) 182 Cal. 140 [ 187 P. 735 ]; State Ins. Fund v. Industrial Comm. (1964) 15 Utah 2d 363 [ 393 P.2d 397 ]; 1 Larson, Workmen’s Compensation Law, § 15.14; cf. Pacific Indem. Co. v.

    Cited 14 timesPublished
  • Burroughs v. Board of Medical Examiners

    31 Cal. 2d 864 · California Supreme Court · Dec 2, 1947

    This is a companion case to Mann v. Board of Medical Examiners, ante, p. 30 [ 187 P.2d 1 ], this day decided, and also to Aarons v. Board of Medical Examiners, ante, p. 863 [ 187 P.2d 8 ].

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Christian v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

    15 Cal. 4th 505 · California Supreme Court · May 12, 1997

    However, the Board found no justification for the assessment of multiple penalties for “that single act of *509 misconduct.” 4 In so doing the Board relied primarily on Gallamore and Jardine v. Workers’ Comp. … J., Werdegar, J., Chin, J., and Brown, J., concurred. All undesignated statutory references are to the Labor Code.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Aarons v. Board of Medical Examiners

    31 Cal. 2d 863 · California Supreme Court · Dec 2, 1947

    This is a companion case to Mann v. Board of Medical Examiners, ante, p. 30 [ 187 P.2d 1 ], this day decided, and also to Burroughs v. Board of Medical Examiners, post, p. 864 [ 187 P.2d 9 ].

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Price v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

    37 Cal. 3d 559 · California Supreme Court · Dec 17, 1984

    Upon reconsideration, the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (board) rescinded the award based on the “going and coming rule.” … The board relied on the fact that Price was not on the employer’s premises when he was injured. Therefore, they concluded that he had not completed his journey to work. (See General Ins. Co. v. Workers’ Comp.

    Cited 15 timesPublished
  • LaTourette v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

    17 Cal. 4th 644 · California Supreme Court · Mar 12, 1998

    Co. v. Ind. Acc. … J., Kennard, J., Baxter, J., Werdegar, J., Chin, J., and Brown, J., concurred.

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Meredith v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

    19 Cal. 3d 777 · California Supreme Court · Aug 16, 1977

    In Sail’er Inn, Inc. v. … {Mathews v. Workmen’s Comp. App. Bd. (1972) 6 Cal.3d 719, 738-740 [ 100 Cal.Rptr. 301 , 493 P.2d 1165 ]; Western Indemnity Co. v. Pillsbury (1915) 170 Cal. 686, 702-703 [ 151 P. 398 ]; Saal v. Workmen’s Comp.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Hogan v. Midland National Insurance

    3 Cal. 3d 553 · California Supreme Court · Nov 25, 1970

    Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co. v. … (Mannheimer Bros. v. Kansas Casualty & Surety Co. (1921) 149 Minn. 482 [ 184 N.W. 189, 190 ]; Prince v. Universal Underwriters Insurance Co. (N.D. 1966) 143 N.W.2d 708, 717 ; Globe Navigation Co. v.

    Cited 138 timesPublished
  • Katz v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

    30 Cal. 3d 353 · California Supreme Court · Dec 7, 1981

    that he had failed to reveal a fee arrangement (see Koker v. … For the reasons set forth in Hustedt v. Workers' Comp.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Paratransit, Inc. v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board

    59 Cal. 4th 551 · California Supreme Court · Jul 3, 2014

    Claimant appealed to the Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board (Board). … Relying on Rowe v.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • Rodgers v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

    36 Cal. 3d 330 · California Supreme Court · Jul 5, 1984

    In Witt v. Jackson (1961) 57 Cal.2d 57 [ 17 Cal.Rptr. 369 , 366 P.2d 641 ] and Roe v. Workmen’s Comp. … In Kemerer v.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • MacGregor v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board

    37 Cal. 3d 205 · California Supreme Court · Nov 8, 1984

    While the Board’s appeal was pending, this court decided Norman v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, supra, 34 Cal.3d 1 . In Norman we discussed the meaning of “good cause” under section 1256. … (Evenson v. Unemployment Ins. Appeals Bd., supra, 62 Cal.App.3d at p. 1016 ; Zorrero v. Unemployment Ins.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Rubino v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board

    8 Cal. 3d 405 · California Supreme Court · Dec 1, 1972

    The Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board (hereinafter referred to as “the board”) appeals from a judgment in favor of plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as “claimant”) after a limited trial de novo following claimant’s appeal … Thereafter, the board reversed the determination of the referee.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Brown v. Franklin Fire Ins. Co. of Phila.

    178 Cal. 302 · California Supreme Court · May 24, 1918

    The finding of the court that Brown owned the property is supported by the evidence. The judgment is therefore affirmed. Melvin, J., and Victor B. Shaw, J., pro tem., concurred.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Friends of Mammoth v. Board of Supervisors

    8 Cal. 3d 247 · California Supreme Court · Sep 21, 1972

    Greene County Planning Board v. Federal Power Com'n (2d Cir. 1972) 455 F.2d 412 , 418-421.) … Siller v. Board of Supervisors (1962) 58 Cal.2d 479, 484 [ 25 Cal.Rptr. 73 , 375 P.2d 41 ].)

    Disapproved on other grounds by Kowis v. Howard, 3 Cal. 4th 888 (1992)Cited 339 timesPublished
  • Agricultural Labor Relations Board v. Superior Court

    16 Cal. 3d 392 · California Supreme Court · Mar 4, 1976

    Board v. Cities Service Oil Co. (2d Cir. 1941) 122 F.2d 149, 152 .] … The court therefore granted enforcement of the board’s order of access. (Accord, Richfield Oil Corp. v.

    Cited 210 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.