Case law

Ballou v. Andrews Banking Co.

128 Cal. 562 · California Supreme Court · May 12, 1900

(Washburn v. Huntington, 78 Cal. 575 ; Matthews v. Chaboya, 111 Cal. 437 .) The transfer, not having been made in the usual and ordinary course of business, was prima fade evidence of fraud. … (Hobart v. Tyrrell, 68 Cal. 12 ; Brown v. Bank of Napa, 77 Cal. 544 .) The defendant must be held under the circumstances to have been aware of the intent of Greenberg Brothers in malting the transfer.

Hough v. McCarthy

54 Cal. 2d 273 · California Supreme Court · Jun 2, 1960

(Whitcomb Hotel, Inc. v. California Emp. … In Moore v. State Board of Equalization, 76 Cal.App.2d 758 [ 174 P.2d 323 ], an attack was made upon the type of hearing there afforded the petitioner.

Curdy v. Berton

5 L.R.A. 189 · California Supreme Court · Jun 4, 1889

(Russell v. Jackson, 10 Hare, 204.)” … {Brown v. Lynch, 1 Paige, 147 ; Williams v. Fitch, 18 N. Y. 546 .)

Sinz v. Owens

33 Cal. 2d 749 · California Supreme Court · Apr 20, 1949

by the Board of Medical Examiners of California or of some other state entitled to recognition in this state on the basis of reciprocity. … (Mann v. Board of Medical Examiners, 31 Cal.2d 30 [ 187 P.2d 1 ].)

Churchill v. Lauer

84 Cal. 233 · California Supreme Court · Jun 2, 1890

In Ballou v. … (Cadi gan v. Brown, 120 Mass. 494 .) We find no decision in this state which establishes a contrary doctrine. In the case of Barham v.

People v. Casper

14 Cal. Rptr. 3d 43 · California Supreme Court · Jun 3, 2004

Opinion BROWN, J. In this case involving the three strikes law, the trial court dismissed the strike allegation as to 34 of 35 counts. (Pen. Code, 1 §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12; People v. … As we delineated at length in People v.

In re Clarke

125 Cal. 388 · California Supreme Court · Jul 17, 1899

Some early eases in this state (Deidesheimer v. Brown, 8 Cal. 340 , and Lyman v. … Anderson v.

Teter v. City of Newport Beach

133 Cal. Rptr. 2d 139 · California Supreme Court · Apr 28, 2003

Recently, in Zelig v. … (Brown v. Poway Unified School Dist. (1993) 4 Cal.4th 820, 829 [ 15 Cal.Rptr.2d 679 , 843 P.2d 624 ].)”

Harris v. Frank

81 Cal. 280 · California Supreme Court · Nov 23, 1889

(Brown v. Brandshaw, 1 Duer, 199 ; Rogers Kneeland, 13 Wend. 114 ; Welsh v. Marvin, 36 Mich. 59 ; Bugbee v. Kendricksen, 130 Mass. 437 ; Langden v. Richardson, 58 Iowa, 610 ; Cole v. Hutchinson, 34 Minn. 410 ; Noyes v. … (Dean v. Tallman, 105 Mass. 443 ; Glenn v. Lehnen, 54 Mo. 45 ; Cowden v. Gottgetreu, 55 N. Y. 650 ; Bloom v. McGrath, 53 Miss. 249 ; Eshlman v. Harnish, 76 Pa. St. 97; Moshier v. Ketchell, 87 Ill. 18 ; Petit v.

Parrish v. Civil Service Commission

66 Cal. 2d 260 · California Supreme Court · Mar 27, 1967

(Garvin v. Chambers (1924) 195 Cal. 212, 224 [ 232 P. 696 ]; Sheehan v. Board of Police Comrs. (1925) 197 Cal. 70, 78 [ 239 P. 844 ]; Forstner v. … The board of supervisors issued its directive concerning the initiation of the operation on November 21, 1962.

Smith v. Garvin

37 Cal. 3d 186 · California Supreme Court · Nov 8, 1984

. § 8341 , Brown v. Devine (N.D.Cal. 1983) 574 F.Supp. 790, 792 ), under the Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act ( 33 U.S.C. § 901 et seq., Powell v. … (See also Adduddell v. Board of Administration (1970) 8 Cal.App.3d 243 [ 87 Cal.Rptr. 268 ]; Brennfleck v. Workmen’s Comp. App. Bd. (1970) 3 Cal.App.3d 666 [ 84 Cal.Rptr. 50 ].)

Marshall v. Dunn

69 Cal. 223 · California Supreme Court · Mar 30, 1886

Marshall, attorney-general, in the sum *224 of seven hundred and fifty dollars, in payment of accounts of said plaintiffs, as allowed by the state board of examiners on the seventh day of April, 1884, in pursuance of section … (See Stratton v. Green, 45 Cal. 151 ; Pol. Code, sec. 433.)

Levin v. State Bar

47 Cal. 3d 1140 · California Supreme Court · Feb 21, 1989

(Rimel v. State Bar (1983) 34 Cal.3d 128, 131 [ 192 Cal.Rptr. 866 , 665 P.2d 956 ]; Toll v. … (See Lawhorn v. State Bar, supra, 43 Cal.3d 1367 .) Thus, in Garlow v.

Reclamation District No. 551 v. Runyon

117 Cal. 164 · California Supreme Court · May 27, 1897

(Reclamation Dist. v. Evans, 61 Cal. 104 ; Reclamation Dist. v. Phillips, 108 *166 Cal. 306 ; Hagar v. Reclamation Dist., 111 U. S. 701 .) … No more responsibility attaches to the person of the consul in such a proceeding than arises in an action to enforce the assessment, or than is occasioned by his appearance before a county board for the equalization of his

People v. Crossdale

116 Cal. Rptr. 2d 686 · California Supreme Court · Feb 21, 2002

Opinion BROWN, J.— The issue in this case is whether a first offense for Penal Code 1 section 502.7, subdivision (a) (section 502.7(a)) can be punished as a felony if the amount of the loss does not exceed $400. … (c), (d)); People v. Salorse (1882) 62 Cal. 139, 142 [grand larceny of horse committed without reference to its value]; People v.

Thompson v. Hance

174 Cal. 572 · California Supreme Court · Mar 10, 1917

In the case of Gassner v. … In that case, and in the later case of Hayne v.

Gilmaker v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n

57 Cal. 2d 627 · California Supreme Court · May 15, 1962

All Persons, 166 Cal. 707, 712 [ 137 P. 919 , L.R.A. 1916B 1209 ] ; see also Schlyen v. Schlyen, 43 Cal.2d 361, 378 [ 273 P.2d 897 ] ; Coons v. … (Brown v. Memorial Nat. Home Foundation, 162 Cal.App.2d 513, 534 [ 329 P.2d 118 , 75 A.L.R.2d 427 ] ; Overall v. Overall, 78 Cal.App. 251, 258-260 [ 248 P. 310 ] ; Vest v.

People v. Collins

21 Cal. 3d 208 · California Supreme Court · May 3, 1978

In Sekt v. … Rossi represents a logical extension of the principles developed in the line of cases dealing with the common law rule, as we recognized in reaffirming its holding in Governing Board v.

People v. Stevens

5 Cal. 2d 92 · California Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1935

(People v. Tedesco, 1 Cal. (2d) 211, 219 [ 34 Pac. (2d) 467 ] ; People v. Bolton, 215 Cal. 12 [ 8 Pac. (2d) 116 ]; People v. Sieber, 201 Cal. 341 [ 257 Pac. 64 ] ; People v. Buchanan, 119 Cal. … (People v. Sieber, 201 Cal. 341, 349 [ 257 Pac. 64 ]; People v. Weber, 139 Cal. 325, 342 [ 86 Pac. 671 ]; People v. Perry, 144 Cal. 748, 750 [ 78 Pac. 284]; People v.

Raun v. Reynolds

11 Cal. 14 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1858

Chy. 172, 180 ; 1 Page, 182 ; Brown and Wife v. Kip et al., 6 Paige, 88 . Our statute provides that when a simple rate of interest is agreed upon, the judgment shall bear the same rate. Wood’s Digest, art. 2838, sec. 2. … Wood’s Digest, 551, sec. 2; Guy v. Franldin, 5 Cal. 416 ; Mount v. Chapman, 9 Cal. 294 ; Emeric v. Tams, 6 Cal. 155 . There was no error in directing the manner in which the mortgaged property should be sold.