Case law

Elliott v. Superior Court of Cal.

168 Cal. 727 · California Supreme Court · Dec 4, 1914

(Neall v. Hill, 16 Cal. 151 , [ 76 P. 508 ]; French Bank Case, 53 Cal. 495 ; Smith v. Superior Court, 97 Cal. 348 , [ 32 P. 322 ]; Smith v. Los Angeles and P.R. Co., 4 Cal. Unrep. 237 , [ 34 P. 242 ]; Murray v. … In Smith v.

Tartar v. Industrial Accident Commission

191 Cal. 703 · California Supreme Court · Aug 31, 1923

Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com., 177 Cal. 378, 381 [ 170 Pac. 822 ] ; Western Indemnity Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com., 182 Cal. 709, 720 [ 190 Pac. 27 ].) … Corp. v. Industrial Acc. Com., 182 Cal. 612 [ 187 Pac. 42 ].)

Central Pacific Railway Co. v. County of Alameda

212 Cal. 348 · California Supreme Court · Apr 27, 1931

supervisors of said county to be a public highway’; and part of the evidence supporting the finding shows that pursuant to a petition presented to the board in November, 1858, survey No. 247 was made by the board and filed … Co. v.

In Re Michele D.

128 Cal. Rptr. 2d 92 · California Supreme Court · Dec 16, 2002

She told Ferrari she went outside, smoked a cigarette, and then boarded a bus with Cameron. … In People v.

Nev. Cty. & Sacramento Canal Co. v. Kidd

37 Cal. 282 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1869

Thus in Brown v. … Smith, 10 Cal. 510 , an action for the diversion of water from Brown’s ditch, which had the prior right, it was held that if “ Brown’s old ditch, so called, was so filled with tailings during the Winter season of 1857 that

Sands v. Morongo Unified School District

53 Cal. 3d 863 · California Supreme Court · May 6, 1991

(See, e.g., Board of Education v. Mergens (1990) 496 U.S. 226 [ 110 L.Ed.2d 191 , 110 S.Ct. 2356 ]; Jimmy Swaggart Ministries v. … In his dissent, Justice Panelli states that in the high court’s most recent establishment clause case, Board of Education 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.

City of Oxnard v. Dale

45 Cal. 2d 729 · California Supreme Court · Dec 9, 1955

(Department of Water & Power v. Vroman, 218 Cal. 206 [ 22 P.2d 698 ] ; California Toll Bridge Authority v. Kelly, 218 Cal. 7 [ 21 P.2d 425 ] ; see also City of Glendale v. … Board of State Harbor Comrs. v. *735 Dean, 118 Cal.App.2d 628 , 632 et seq. [ 258 P.2d 590 ].)

In re Estate of Williams

102 Cal. 70 · California Supreme Court · Mar 29, 1894

(Jolley v. Foltz, 34 Cal. 321 ; Reclamation District v. Goldman, 65 Cal. 638 ; Van Deusen v. Sweet, 51 N. Y. 378 ; Williams v. Cammack, 27 Miss. 209 ; 61 Am. Dec. 508 ; 2 Freeman on Judgments, 4th ed., sec. 518.) … (Ross v. Ross, 129 Mass. 246 ; 37 Am.

Bean v. Ford

32 Cal. 4th 160 · California Supreme Court · Jan 15, 2004

In Mingo v. … (Cavanaugh v.

People v. Hill

125 Cal. 16 · California Supreme Court · Jun 9, 1899

The absolute requirement is because of the power given the board to delay opening the polls. … The decisions rendered in Staude v. Election Commrs., 61 Cal. 313 ; Thomason v. Ashworth, 73 Cal. 73; People v. Henshaw, 76 Cal. 436 , and other cases cited, have no bearing whatever upon this matter.

Pacific R.R. Adver. Co. v. Conrad

168 Cal. 91 · California Supreme Court · Jun 26, 1914

The methods of public announcements or advertisments prevailing in the city of Alameda are the newspapers, outdoor displays on bill-boards, and displays in ears. … (In re Guerrero, 69 Cal. 88 , [. 10 Pac. 261 ] ; Wolf v. Lansing, 53 Mich. 367 , [ 19 N. W. 38 ]; Fifth Ave. Coach Co. v. New York, 194 N. Y. 19 , [21 L. R. A. (N. S.) 744, 16 Ann. Cas. 695, 86 N. E. 824 ] ; Stull v.

People v. Valencia

120 Cal. Rptr. 2d 131 · California Supreme Court · Jun 3, 2002

In People v. … Baxter, J., Werdegar, J., Chin, J., Brown, J., and Moreno, J., concurred. Unless otherwise specified, all section references are to the Penal Code.

People v. Franklin

84 Cal. Rptr. 2d 241 · California Supreme Court · May 3, 1999

BROWN, J.—I dissent. Undoubtedly, Penal Code section 290 1 would benefit from a substantial rewriting. … (Lungren v. Deukmejian (1988) 45 Cal.3d 727, 735 [ 248 Cal.Rptr. 115 , 755 P.2d 299 ]; see also United States v. Brown (1948) 333 U.S. 18, 25-26 [ 68 S.Ct. 376, 379-380 , 92 L.Ed. 442 ].)

People v. Porter

6 Cal. 26 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1856

The fact that Badgley had resigned his office having been announced in the newspapers, the Board of Supervisors for Calaveras County ordered an election to fill the vacancy caused by said resignation, to take place on the … The case of People v. Brenham, 3 Cal. R. 491, is cited in support of this doctrine. The opinion in that case does not go to the extent claimed by counsel, and is not applicable to the ease under consideration.

City & County of San Francisco v. Pac. Tel. & Tel. Co.

166 Cal. 244 · California Supreme Court · Oct 1, 1913

Co. v. Board of Supervisors, 29 Wis. 116; Milwaukee etc. *249 Ry. Co. v. Milwaukee, 34 Wis. 271 ; Milwaukee E. R. & L. Co. v. Milwaukee, 95 Wis. 42 , [ 60 Am. St. Rep. 81 , 3 L. R. A. 45, 69 N. … This is clearly decided in City of Los Angeles v.

Pacific Sash & Door Co. v. Bumiller

162 Cal. 664 · California Supreme Court · May 24, 1912

(Ah Louis v. Harwood, 140 Cal. 506 , [ 74 Pac. 41 ]; Hines v. Miller, 122 Cal. 521 , [ 55 Pac. 401 ].) … Lard-oil applied to the threads of joints of pipe used in the structure, insulated or covered electric wire used for drop lights attached thereto, paste for soldering joints, asbestos comprising a part of the electric switch-board

People v. Kirkpatrick

7 Cal. 4th 988 · California Supreme Court · Jun 13, 1994

There was no error under People v. Brown, supra, 40 Cal.3d 512 . IX. … (People v. Hawthorne (1992) 4 Cal.4th 43, 73-74 [ 14 Cal.Rptr.2d 133 , 841 P.2d 118 ]; People v. Wharton (1991) 53 Cal.3d 522, 600 [ 280 Cal.Rptr. 631 , 809 P.2d 290 ]; People v. Brown, supra, 46 Cal.3d 432, 460 .)

People v. Quinn

61 Cal. 2d 551 · California Supreme Court · Jul 14, 1964

(People v. McFarland, 58 Cal.2d 748, 760 *556 [ 26 Cal.Rptr. 473 , 376 P.2d 449]; Neal v. State of California, 55 Cal.2d 11, 19 [ 9 Cal.Rptr. 607 , 357 P.2d 839 ]; People v. Brown, 49 Cal.2d 577, 591 [ 320 P.2d 5 ].) … (People v. McFarland, supra, 58 Cal.2d 748, 760 ; People v. Griffin, 209 Cal.App.2d 125, 129 [ 25 Cal.Rptr. 667 ]; People v. Nor Woods, supra, 37 Cal.2d 584, 586 ; People v. Kehoe, supra, 33 Cal.2d 711, 715 .)

Burris v. Superior Court

22 Cal. Rptr. 3d 876 · California Supreme Court · Jan 10, 2005

App.2d 490, 494 , 265 P.2d 105 ; People v. Brown (1919) 42 Cal.App. 462, 464-465 , 183 P. 829 .) Burris and amicus curiae the Los Angeles County Public Defender rely on one Court of Appeal decision, People v. … We Concur: GEORGE, C.J., KENNARD, BAXTER, CHIN, BROWN, and MORENO, JJ.