Case law

Griffin Development Co. v. City of Oxnard

39 Cal. 3d 256 · California Supreme Court · Aug 1, 1985

See Santa Monica Pines, Ltd. v. Rent Control Board (1984) 35 Cal.3d 858, 868 [ 201 Cal.Rptr. 593 , 679 P.2d 27 ].) … Board of Public Works (1925) 195 Cal. 477, 485 [ 234 P. 381 , 38 A.L.R. 1479 ]. See, also, Fisher v. City of Berkeley (1984) 37 Cal.3d 644, 676 [ 209 Cal.Rptr. 682 , 693 P.2d 261 ].)

Desmond v. Dunn

55 Cal. 242 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1880

Lim. 63; Commonwealth v. The Council of Montrose, 52 Pa. St. 391; Wise v. Button, 25 Wis. 109 .) To the foregoing views, one objection is raised, which is not wholly devoid of plausibility. … (Packer v. S. & E. R. Co. 19 Pa. St. 211.)

People v. Duroncelay

48 Cal. 2d 766 · California Supreme Court · Jun 21, 1957

v. … (People v. Simon, 45 Cal.2d 645, 648-649 [ 290 P.2d 531 ]; People v. Boyles, 45 Cal.2d 652, 655 [ 290 P.2d 535 ] ; People v. Martin, 45 Cal.2d 755, 762 [ 290 P.2d 855 ].)

Bridges v. Superior Court

14 Cal. 2d 464 · California Supreme Court · Oct 16, 1939

Cas. 1915D, 702]; White v. Superior Court, 110 Cal. 60, 64 [ 42 Pac. 480 ] ; Imperial Water Co. v. Board of Supervisors, 162 Cal. 14 [ 120 Pac. 780 ].) … This contention is based upon what petitioner conceives to be the legal effect of federal legislation establishing the National Labor Relations Board and conferring upon that board certain powers respecting labor disputes

O'Sullivan v. Griffith

153 Cal. 502 · California Supreme Court · Apr 30, 1908

(Hickman v. Alpaugh, 21 Cal 266 ; Hill v. Grigsby, 32 Cal. 60 ; Masters v. Lash, 61 Cal. 624 ; Shumway v. Leakey, 67 Cal. 460 , [ 8 Pac. 12 ] ; Mortimer v. Marder, 93 Cal. 178 , [ 28 Pac. 814 ] ; Lux v. … Haggin, 69 Cal. 255 , [ 4 Pac 919 , 10 Pac. 674 ] ; Cavallaro v. Texas etc. Ry. Co., 110 Cal. 357 , [ 52 Am. St. Rep. 94 , 42 Pac. 918 ] ; Brown v. San Francisco Gas Co., 58 Cal. 426 .)

Continental Building & Loan Ass'n v. Hutton

144 Cal. 609 · California Supreme Court · Sep 6, 1904

Proc., sec. 4; Corbett v. Chambers, 109 Cal. 184 .) … To be sure, the materials were to be delivered in the first instance on board the cars at Napa, where the respondents’ place of business was, but as Waggoner, the contractor, testifies, “The mill work was to be furnished

Chrissinger v. Southern Pacific Co.

169 Cal. 619 · California Supreme Court · Mar 16, 1915

Co. v. Kane, 118 Fed. 234 , [ 55 C. C. A. 129 ]; Herbert v. Southern Pacific Co., 121 Cal. 232 , [ 53 Pac. 651 ] ; Heitman v. Pacific Electric Ry. Co., 10 Cal. App. 398 , [ 102 Pac. 15 ] ; Wilkinson v. … Co., 35 Utah 110 , [ 99 Pac. 466 ]; Bates v. San Pedro, etc. R. Co. 38 Utah 569 , [ 114 Pac. 527 ]; Brown v. Pacific Electric Ry. Co., 167 Cal. 199, 204 , [ 138 Pac. 1005 ].)

McGarrahan v. New Idria Mining Co.

49 Cal. 331 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1874

The patent is evidence of the series of proceedings recited in it; and as the deed of the United States took effect by relation as of the date of the presentation of the petition for confirmation of the grant to the Board … (Gee v. Moore, 14 Cal. 472 ; Kimball v. Semple, 25 Cal. 440 ; Morrison v. Wilson, 30 Cal. 344 .)

McAneny v. Superior Court of Santa Clara Cty.

150 Cal. 6 · California Supreme Court · Oct 4, 1906

Painter, 98 Cal. 626 , [ 33 Pac. 483 ]; Born v. Horstmann, 80 Cal. 452 ; Baldwin v. Superior Court, 125 Cal. 584 , [ 58 Pac. 185 ] ; Anderson v. Anderson, 123 Cal. 445 , [ 56 Pac. 61 ]; Brown v. … Co. v.

Comfort v. Comfort

17 Cal. 2d 736 · California Supreme Court · Apr 18, 1941

(Gross v. Gross, [N. J. Ch.] 180 Atl. 204 ; Haring v. Kauffman, 13 N. J. Eq. 397 [ 78 Am. Dec. 102 ]; Perlman v. Perlman, 113 N. J. Eq. 3 [ 165 Atl. 646 ]; Di Brigida v. Di Brigida, 116 N. J. … In Cardinale v.

In Re Wallace

24 Cal. 2d 933 · California Supreme Court · Oct 2, 1944

Holohan, 294 U.S. 103 [ 55 S.Ct. 340 , 79 L.Ed. 791 , 98 A.L.R. 406 ]), or using a confession with the knowledge that it was obtained by force or fraud (Brown v. … Impartiality in a judge or juror is indispensable to a fair trial (Tumey v. Ohio, 273 U.S. 510, 530 [ 47 S.Ct. 437 , 71 L.Ed. 749 ]; Baker v.

Newhall v. Bank of Livermore

136 Cal. 533 · California Supreme Court · Jun 12, 1902

(Mascarel v. Raffour, 51 Cal. 242 ; Hall v. Arnott, 80 Cal. 348 ; Commercial Bank v. Kershner, 120 Cal. 495 .) … (Biddel v. Brizzolara, 64 Cal. 362 ; Bull v. Coe, 77 Cal. 54 ; 1 Woodward v.

Lazzarevich v. Lazzarevich

39 Cal. 2d 48 · California Supreme Court · May 20, 1952

(Bacon v. Wahrhaftig, 97 Cal.App.2d 599, 603 [ 218 P.2d 144 ] ; Rowland v. Clark, 91 Cal.App.2d 880, 882 [ 206 P.2d 59 ] ; Miranda v. Miranda, 81 Cal.App.2d 61, 65 [ 183 P.2d 61 ] ; De Roulet v. … Catherine relies on Ventre v.

Stott v. Johnston

36 Cal. 2d 864 · California Supreme Court · Mar 30, 1951

Upon making inquiry, plaintiff discovered that Johnston had never communicated with the state license board. Plaintiff then asked the board to have the jobs checked. … In Grupe v.

Burce v. Jack

135 Cal. 535 · California Supreme Court · Feb 20, 1902

The petitioner presented his claim for services rendered in 1899 as justice of the peace, and it was allowed by the board of supervisors for seven dollars in each of four criminal cases, or an aggregate of twenty-eight dollars … (Dwyer v. Parker, 115 Cal. 544 ; Kiernan v. Swan, 131 Cal. 410 .)

Walls v. Preston

25 Cal. 59 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1864

(Rice v. Gashire, 13 Cal. 53 ; Brown v. Tolles, 7 Cal. 399 .) … In Hunt v.

Magee v. McManus

70 Cal. 553 · California Supreme Court · Aug 31, 1886

(Morrison v. Rossignol, 5 Cal. 64 ; Los Angeles etc. Ass’n v. Phillips, 56 Cal. 539 ; Potts v. Whitehead, 20 N. J. Eq. 55.) Irvine v. … Brown, 9 Smedes & M. 167 , and Pratt v. Carroll, 8 Cranch, 471 , have no application.

Nolan Bros. Shoe Co. v. Nolan

131 Cal. 271 · California Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1900

(Browne on Trademarks, sec. 681.) In Julian v. Julian Hoosier Drill Co., Am. Tr. M. … (England v. New York Pub. Co., 8 Daly, 375 .) ' The remaining propositions advanced by appellant are not, considered meritorious.

Humbert v. Dunn

84 Cal. 57 · California Supreme Court · May 3, 1890

virtue of his appointment, qualification, and acts as a member of said commission, there is due to him as salary for the month of November, 1889, the sum of two hundred dollars; that his claim was duly presented to the state board … (Proll v. Dunn, 80 Cal. 220 .) In Ristine v.

Fraser v. Freelon

53 Cal. 644 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1879

It *647 was held in People v. County Judge, 40 Cal. 479 , that the People were not interested in the action, and were improperly made parties thereto. … affirms by necessary implication the existence of the Court as a judicial tribunal; and in fact the writ will not issue unless it be shown that the proceedings which are sought to be reviewed were had before a tribunal, board