Case law

Haworth v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County

50 Cal. 4th 372 · California Supreme Court · Aug 2, 2010

Mitchell; Dunn Koes, Brown Shenoi Koes, Shenoi Koes, Pamela E. Dunn, Mayo L. Makarczyk, Daniel J. Koes, Allan A. Shenoi and Michael R. Brown for Real Party in Interest. Sharon J. … An earlier case, People v. Brown (1993) 6 Cal.4th 322, 336-337 [ 24 Cal.Rptr.2d 710 , 862 P.2d 710 ], has been cited for the proposition that a trial court's ruling on a motion to disqualify a judge is reviewed de novo.

Hyman Bros. Box & Label Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission

180 Cal. 423 · California Supreme Court · May 29, 1919

(B rooker v. Warner, 23 L. T. … In Peru Basket Co. v. Kuntz (Ind.

Rogers v. Duhart

97 Cal. 500 · California Supreme Court · Mar 10, 1893

(Jones v. Steamer Cortes, 17 Cal. 487 ; 79 Am. Dec. 142 ; Goulet v. Asseler, 22 N. Y. 225 ; Matthews v. McPherson, 65 N. C. 189 ; Brown v. Bridges, 31 Iowa, 145 .) … In Heilbron v.

Automotriz Del Golfo De California v. Resnick

47 Cal. 2d 792 · California Supreme Court · Jan 30, 1957

Kimball Co. v. Read, 43 Cal.App. 342, 346 [ 185 P. 192 ] ; see McMillan Process Co. v. Brown, 33 Cal.App.2d 279, 284 [ 91 P.2d 613 ]; Indian Refining Co., Inc. v. … In Carlesimo v.

People v. Rideaux

61 Cal. 2d 537 · California Supreme Court · Jul 9, 1964

Also, two brown paper bags and some “play” money, of a type utilized in the theft schemes, were found in the car in. which defendant was arrested. … Singh, 11 Cal.App.2d 244, 255-257 [ 53 P.2d 403 ]; People v. Newman, 113 Cal.App. 679, 681-683 [ 298 P. 1044 ]; People v.

Ranger v. Alamitos Bay Yacht Club

California Supreme Court · Feb 27, 2025

Once the vessel had been lowered into the water, Ranger boarded to unlock the vessel from the boom and moor it to the dock. … Club negligently failed to provide Ranger with adequate training, policies and procedures for safe docking and boarding, and safe access to the vessel.

Helms v. Dunne

107 Cal. 117 · California Supreme Court · Apr 6, 1895

We do not think that chapter V, article I, of title I, part I, of the Code of Civil Procedure is in any sense special legislation, and we have no doubt but that the sections of the code found in that article are in full force … Section 36 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that the board of supervisors shall appoint a “justices’ clerk,” and such, undoubtedly, is the technical name of the office, but we think the variance between the two terms

Hill v. Den

121 Cal. 42 · California Supreme Court · May 31, 1898

In Fuller v. … him, or In Abbott v.

Larue v. Barr

208 Cal. 493 · California Supreme Court · Nov 4, 1929

The ease of Smith v. … To the same effect is the case of Kauffman v. Maier, 94 Cal. 269 [18 L. R. A. 124, 29 Pac. 481 ].

Barney v. Pforr

117 Cal. 56 · California Supreme Court · May 21, 1897

To support the deed of a corporation, which, as in this case, is without a corporate seal, “ it is incumbent on the party relying on it to show affirmatively that it was executed by authority of a resolution of the board … (Fudickar v. East Riverside Irr. Dist., 109 Cal. 39 ; Smith v. Dorn, 96 Cal. 73 ; Salfield v. Sutter County etc. R. Co., 94 Cal. 546 ; Alta Silver Min. Co. v. Alta Placer Min. Co., 78 Cal. 629 ; Southern Cal. Col.

People v. Carlton

57 Cal. 83 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1880

Poole, the gentleman that was boarding there, came and told him (deceased) of the article—told him that Mr. … The same doctrine in respect to threats not communicated is adopted in People v. Scoggins, 37 Cal. 676 , and in People v. Alvitre, 55 id. 263.

Dorsey v. Manlove

14 Cal. 553 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1860

(See, also, Smith v. Sherwood, 2 Texas, 460 ; Pacific Ins. Co. v. Conrad, 1 Bald. 138; Eames v. New England Worsted Co. 11 Met. 570 ; Clark v. Brown, 18 Wend. 213 ; Astley v. Harrison, 1 Esp. 48; Sims v. … It is argued that the measure of damages applied in Phelps v.

Plummer v. Sheldon

94 Cal. 533 · California Supreme Court · May 16, 1892

It was laid out by those who supposed they were acting under the authority of the board of supervisors of the county, although the proceedings taken, as shown in the evidence, do not appear to have been entirely correct or … (Babcock v. Welsh, 71 Cal. 402 ; Pol. Code, secs. 2619-2621; Bolger v. Foss, 65 Cal. 250 .)

Melamed v. Cedars-Sinai Med. Ctr.

219 Cal. Rptr. 3d 27 · California Supreme Court · Jun 21, 2017

The matter is transferred to the Court of Appeal, Second District, Division One, for reconsideration in light of Park v. … Board of Trustees of the California State University (2017) 2 Cal.5th 1057 , 217 Cal.Rptr.3d 130 , 393 P.3d 905 .

Vejar v. Mound City Land & Water Ass'n

97 Cal. 659 · California Supreme Court · Mar 24, 1893

In their opinion in Dalton v. United States, the board of land commissioners state that the claimant has presented two grants: 1. One in which the property granted is designated by the name of San José; 2. … The board of land commissioners, in Dalton v.

People v. Bramit

46 Cal. 4th 1221 · California Supreme Court · Jul 16, 2009

(Uttecht v. Brown (2007) 551 U.S. 1, 7 [ 167 L.Ed.2d 1014 , 127 S.Ct. 2218 ]; see People v. Wilson (2008) 44 Cal.4th 758, 779 [ 80 Cal.Rptr.3d 211 , 187 P.3d 1041 ] (Wilson).) Defendant’s reliance on People v. … V, § 8, subd. (a)) and only upon consultation with the Board of Prison Terms (§§ 4802, 4812, 4813).

Ex parte Spencer

83 Cal. 460 · California Supreme Court · Mar 24, 1890

The case of Eidenmuller v. Eidenmuller was based upon statutes entirely different from the provisions of our code. … In this state divorce is absolute; there is no such thing as divorce from bed and board under the law as it now exists. When • a marriage is dissolved, each party is relieved from all the obligations of the bond.

People v. Barnwell

63 Cal. Rptr. 3d 82 · California Supreme Court · Jul 26, 2007

Brown (2004) 33 Cal.4th 382, 401 , 15 Cal.Rptr.3d 624 , 93 P.3d 244 ( Brown) . ) The death penalty is not unconstitutional for failing to impose a specific burden of proof as to the existence of aggravating circumstances, … (See, e.g., Brown, supra, 33 Cal.4th 382 , 401, 15 Cal.Rptr.3d 624 , 93 P.3d 244 .) Nor do the high court's decisions in Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466 , 120 S.Ct. 2348 , 147 L.Ed.2d 435 , Ring v.

Pacific Coast Dairy, Inc. v. Department of Agriculture

19 Cal. 2d 818 · California Supreme Court · Mar 12, 1942

(Milk Control Board v. Eisenberg Farm Products, 306 U. S. 346 [ 59 S. Ct. 528 , 83 L. Ed. 752 ]; Alabama v. King and Boozer, U. S. [ 62 S. Ct. 43 , L. Ed.]; James v. Bramo Contracting Co., 302 U. S. 134 [ 58 S. … (Milk Control Board v. Gosselin’s Dairy, Inc., 301 Mass. 174 [16 N. E. (2d) 641]; Paterson Milk & Cream Co., Inc. v. Milk Control Board, 118 N. J. L. 383 [ 192 Atl. 838 ]; Alabama v. King & Boozer, -- U. S. - [ 62 S.

Briggs v. Eden Council for Hope & Opportunity

81 Cal. Rptr. 2d 471 · California Supreme Court · Jan 21, 1999

County of Sacramento (1982) 31 Cal.3d 676, 680 , 183 Cal.Rptr. 520 , 646 P.2d 191 , quoting Board of Port Commrs. v. Williams (1937) 9 Cal.2d 381, 389 , 70 P.2d 918 .) … BROWN, J., concurs. NOTES [1] Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. We previously have adopted this acronym for lawsuits affecting speech or petition rights. (See Rosenthal v. Great Western Fin.