Case law

Wells v. Lloyd

21 Cal. 2d 452 · California Supreme Court · Dec 23, 1942

There was evidence that Bay Cities proposed to make an independent investigation of the value of the bonds it was to receive; that the proposed purchase was approved by the corporation’s board of directors on condition of … Rishell was appointed by the board of directors to make the investigation; that defendants Commagere and Lloyd represented that Bay Cities would be able to make the investigation while the deal was in escrow; that J. D.

Quinn v. Rosenfeld

15 Cal. 2d 486 · California Supreme Court · Apr 30, 1940

(Brown v. Regan, 10 Cal. (2d) 519 [ 75 Pac. (2d) 1063 ].) By section 562 (a) of the Vehicle Code the plaintiff was required to yield the right of way to all vehicles on the roadway. … (Genola v. Barnett, 14 Cal. (2d) 217 [ 93 Pac. (2d) 109 ], and cases cited; see, also, Mitrovich v. Graves, 25 Cal. App. (2d) 649 [ 78 Pac. (2d) 227 ].) The case of Meincke v.

People v. Saddler

24 Cal. 3d 671 · California Supreme Court · Jul 25, 1979

The man was at first unable to recall the maiden name, then stated it was "Brown." Mrs. … In People v.

In Re Estate of Upham

127 Cal. 90 · California Supreme Court · Dec 4, 1899

(Ricker v. Cornwell, 113 N. Y. 115 ; In re Benson, 96 N. Y. 499 ; 48 Am. Rep. 646 ; Cruikshank v. Home for the Friendless, 113 N. Y. 337 ; Carter v. Board of Education, 144 N. Y. 621 ; In re Bonnet, 113 N. … In Schmidt v.

Emeric v. Gilman

10 Cal. 404 · California Supreme Court · Oct 5, 1858

In Russell v. … (Act to create a Board of Supervisors, § 24; Practice Act, as amended, § 219 ; Gilman v. Contra Costa County, 8 Cal., 52 ; Wilson v. Commissioners of Huntington, 7 Seargt. and Rawle, 199.) Judgment affirmed.

McQuilken v. Central Pacific Railroad

64 Cal. 463 · California Supreme Court · Jan 22, 1884

(Michigan Central Railroad v. Coleman, 28 Mich. 440 .) … (Robinson v. W. P. R. R. Co. 48 Cal. 409 .) Bancroft v. Boston etc. R.

Financial Indemnity Co. v. Superior Court

45 Cal. 2d 395 · California Supreme Court · Oct 28, 1955

Brown, Attorney General, Everett W. Mattoon, Assistant Attorney General, and Lee B. Stanton, Deputy Attorney General, for Real Party in Interest. EDMONDS, J. G. … In Brock v.

Robison v. Superior Court of the City & County of San Francisco

49 Cal. 2d 186 · California Supreme Court · Oct 4, 1957

Brown, Attorney General, Clarence A. Linn, Assistant Attorney General, and Victor Griffith, Deputy Attorney General, for Respondents. *187 McCOMB, J. … (People v.

Schucking v. Merritt

143 Cal. 487 · California Supreme Court · Jun 9, 1904

v. … In Smith v.

Dupuy v. Leavenworth

17 Cal. 262 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1861

(See Andrew's Heirs v. Brown's Heirs, 21 Ala. 443 ; Delmonico v. Guillaume, 2 Sand. Ch. 367 .) … (McCosker v. Brady, 1 Barbour Chancery Rep. 343; 1 Coms. 214; 1 Story's Equ. Plead. 232.) Judgment affirmed.

San Francisco Civil Service Assn. v. Superior Court

16 Cal. 3d 46 · California Supreme Court · Feb 4, 1976

On March 8, 1974, real party in interest State of California on the relation of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay region (hereafter Regional Board and plaintiff) brought the underlying action for … Younger v. Superior Court, ante, page 30 [ 127 Cal.Rptr. 122 , 544 P.2d 1322 ]. In People ex rel. Younger v.

Hennesey v. Bingham

125 Cal. 627 · California Supreme Court · Sep 5, 1899

The lumber was delivered by the shippers in boxes, which consisted of four boards nailed together, and were about fifteen feet long and eight inches in each of the other dimensions. … (Elledge v. National etc. Ry. Co., 100 Cal. 282 ; 38 Am. St. Rep. 290 ; Civ. Code, sec. 1971.)

People v. Ault

33 Cal. 4th 1250 · California Supreme Court · Aug 16, 2004

In People v. … County of Orange (1982) 130 Cal.App.3d 944, 955 [ 182 Cal.Rptr. 176 ] (Andrews) [juror misconduct]; People v. Brown (1976) 61 Cal.App.3d 476, 481-482 [ 132 Cal.Rptr. 217 ] (Brown) [juror misconduct]; Clemens v.

City of Palm Springs v. Ringwald

52 Cal. 2d 620 · California Supreme Court · Aug 18, 1959

In Housing Authority v. … In Board of State Harbor Commissioners v. Dean, 118 Cal.App.2d 628, 631 [ 258 P.2d 590 ], the San Francisco Harbor benefited; the special fund was provided from revenue derived from harbor facilities.

People v. Terry

44 Cal. 2d 371 · California Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1955

Schwartz, supra [ 109 Cal.App.2d 450 ( 240 P.2d 1024 )], at p. 455; People v. Grijalva, 48 Cal.App.2d 690, 694 [ 121 P.2d 32 ]; People v. Lee, 9 Cal.App.2d 99, 109 [ 48 P.2d 1003 ]).” (People v. … This was recognized in People v.

Lawson v. Guild

215 Cal. 378 · California Supreme Court · Apr 12, 1932

(Bley v. Board of Dental Examiners, 101 Cal. App. 666, 669 [ 282 Pac. 19 ].) In the instant case the judgment was entered approximately five and one-half months prior to the filing of the notice of appeal. … (Ransome-Crummey Co. v. Beggs, 185 Cal. 279 [ 196 Pac. 487 ] ; Bates v. Ransome-Crummey Co., 42 Cal. App. 699, 702, 703 [184 Pac. 39]; Pacific Light & Power Corp. v. Kauffman, 39 Cal.

Communities for a Better Environment v. South Coast Air Quality Management District

48 Cal. 4th 310 · California Supreme Court · Mar 15, 2010

of Amador v. … Board of Supervisors (1991) 226 Cal.App.3d 1467, 1477-1484 [ 277 Cal.Rptr. 481 ] (modified location of winery construction project on which CEQA review was already complete); Committee for a Progressive Gilroy v.

People v. Adamson

33 Cal. 2d 286 · California Supreme Court · Jan 11, 1949

(See People v. Gilbert (1944), 25 Cal.2d 422, 439 [ 154 P.2d 657 ]; People v. Sandoval (1927), 200 Cal. 730, 733 [ 254 P. 893 ]; People v. Vernon (1935), 9 Cal.App.2d 138, 141 [ 49 P.2d 326 ]; People v. … (Rittersbacher v. Board of Supervisors (1934), 220 Cal. 535, 539 [ 32 P.2d 135 ] [mandate]; Hanke v. McLaughlin (1912), 20 Cal.App. 204 [ 128 P. 772 ] [mandate]; Tyler v. City Council of Huntington Park (1929), 97 Cal.

Mulcahy v. Hibernia Savings & Loan Society

144 Cal. 219 · California Supreme Court · Jul 25, 1904

Co. v. Pierce, 90 Cal. 131 ; Reynolds v. Bank of Mt. Vernon, 6 App. Div. 62 , 39 N. Y. Sup. 626; McNab v. McNab & Harlan Mfg. Co., 62 Hun, 21 , 16 N. Y. Sup. 448; Williams v. Western Union Tel. Co., 93 N. … Co. v. Henley, 23 Ind. App. 14 ; Cleveland etc. Ry. Co. v. Shrum, 24 Ind. App. 96 .)

Loper v. Morrison

23 Cal. 2d 600 · California Supreme Court · Jan 20, 1944

(See Brown, Law and Fact, 56 Harv.L.Rev. 899.) In the present case the court can determine better than the jury the extent of the vicarious liability to which the Arden Milk Company should be subject. … (Gordoy v. Flaherty, 9 Cal.2d 716 [ 72 P.2d 538 ]; Peccolo v. City of Los Angeles, 8 Cal.2d 532 [ 66 P.2d 651 ]; Kish v. California State Automobile Assn., 190 Cal. 246 [ 212 P. 27 ]; Martinelli v.