Case law

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.

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 .)

Boone v. Oakland Transit Co.

139 Cal. 490 · California Supreme Court · Jul 2, 1903

him to say that he would; that as the car approached nearly to Third Avenue it slowed down, apparently as if about to stop to enable her to get off; that in anticipation of its stopping she stood up on the step or running-board … (Jones on Evidence, sec. 360; Lissak v. Crocker Estate Co., 119 Cal. 442 People v. Wong Ark, 96 Cal. 125 ; Durkee v. Central Pacific R. R. Co., 69 Cal. 533 . 1 ) Nor can it be said that the testimony was not injurious.

Estrin v. Superior Court

14 Cal. 2d 670 · California Supreme Court · Nov 30, 1939

In the case of Karry v. … (See, also, to the same effect, Borchard v. Board of Supervisors, 144 Cal. 10, 14 [ 77 Pac. 708 ].)

Bigsby v. Johnson

18 Cal. 2d 860 · California Supreme Court · Oct 28, 1941

Walker Engraving Corp. v. Graves, 243 App. Div. 652 [ 276 N. Y. Supp. 674 ]; aff’d 268 N. Y. 648 [ 198 N. E. 539 ]; People ex rel. Foremost Studio Inc. v. Graves, 246 App. Div. 130 [ 284 N. Y. Supp. 906 ]; Cusick v. … The *863 tax is imposed upon retailers for the privilege of doing a retail sales business (Western Lithograph Co. v. State Board of Equalization, 11 Cal. (2d) 156, 164 [ 78 Pac. (2d) 731 , 117 A. L.

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.

Miller v. Johnson

4 Cal. 2d 265 · California Supreme Court · Sep 3, 1935

(See, for example, Skelly v. Westminster School Dist., 103 Cal. 652 [ 37 Pac. 643 ]; City of Sacramento v. Industrial Acc. Com., 74 Cal. App. 386 [ 240 Pac. 792 ]; People v. … This was, indeed, recognized by this court in People v. Stanley, 193 Cal. 428 [ 225 Pac. 1 ]. (See, also, Dalzell v. Bourbon County Board of Education, 193 Ky. 171 [ 235 S. W. 360 ].)

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.

Ellis v. Jefferds

130 Cal. 478 · California Supreme Court · Nov 10, 1900

A somewhat similar question is decided in Whiting v. Plumas Co., 64 Cal. 66 . The cases cited by the appellant’s counsel have no application. In Cooley v. … (McCabe v. Jefferds, 122 Cal. 302 ; County of Tulare v. Jefferds, 118 Cal. 361 ; Cody v. Murphey, 89 Cal. 522 ; People v. Henshaw, 76 Cal. 436 .) The judgment and order appealed from should be affirmed.

People v. Perez

29 Cal. Rptr. 3d 423 · California Supreme Court · Jun 20, 2005

BROWN, J., Concurring.—I agree with parts I and II of the majority opinion, and part HI to the extent it concludes that the jury was presented with a legally inadequate theory. … In Griffin v.

Allred v. Pioneer Truck Co.

179 Cal. 315 · California Supreme Court · Nov 21, 1918

(Hebard v. Mabie, 98 Ill. App. 543 ; Bishop v. Union R. R. Co., 14 R. I. 314, [ 51 Am. Rep. 386 ]; Hestonville etc. Ry. Co. v. Connell, 88 Pa. St. 520, [ 32 Am. Rep. 472 ].) The facts involved in the case of Cahill v. … Co. v. Webb, 129 Ky. 395 , [ 130 Am. St. Rep. 469 , 18 L. R. A. (N. S.) 179, 111 S. W. 712 ]; Underwood v. Western A. R. Co., 105 Ga. 48 , [ 31 S. E. 123 ].)

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.

Travelers Insurance v. Transport Indemnity Co.

6 Cal. 3d 514 · California Supreme Court · Jan 25, 1972

Ball, Hunt, Hart, Brown & Baerwitz and Clyde C. Beery for Plaintiffs and Respondents. OPINION McCOMB, J. … Co. v. Colonial Ins. Co., 242 Cal. App.2d 227 [ 51 Cal. Rptr. 724 ].

Estate of Vanderhurst

171 Cal. 553 · California Supreme Court · Dec 16, 1915

But this court adopts the language of the court of appeals of New York in Brown v. Clark, 77 N. … Ency. of Law [2d ed., p. 760, sec. 2]; Bowron v. Kent, 190 N. Y. 422, 432 , 83 N. E. 472 ; Needles v. Needles, 7 Ohio St. 432 , [ 70 Am. Dec. 85 ].)

Glenn R. Sewell Sheet Metal, Inc. v. Loverde

70 Cal. 2d 666 · California Supreme Court · Mar 28, 1969

Compare Strecker v. Barnard (1952) 109 Cal.App.2d 149 [ 240 P.2d 345 ], with Browning v. Aymard (1964) 224 Cal.App.2d 277 [ 36 Cal.Rptr. 604 ]. See also, 1 American Law of Property, supra, section 3.80, pages 353-355. … (Brown v. Kling (1894) 101 Cal. 295, 299 [ 35 P. 995 ]; Monson 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.

Neuval v. Cowell

36 Cal. 648 · California Supreme Court · Jan 15, 1869

The contract sued on is a private contract, by which Menant & Co. agreed to do the work in front of defendant’s lot in accordance with the order of the Board of Supervisors and the law, and in accordance with the specifications … (Hicks v. Coleman, 25 *651 Cal. 122 .)

People v. Sanders

55 Cal. 4th 731 · California Supreme Court · Nov 19, 2012

(People v. Smith (1950) 36 Cal.2d 444, 448 [ 224 P.2d 719 ]; see People v. … (Garrett v. United States (1985) 471 U.S. 773, 779 [ 85 L.Ed.2d 764 , 105 S.Ct. 2407 ]; Brown v. Ohio (1977) 432 U.S. 161, 165 [ 53 L.Ed.2d 187 , 97 S.Ct. 2221 ].)

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 .)

Nelson v. Superior Court

9 Cal. 2d 729 · California Supreme Court · Oct 25, 1937

Petitioner is the secretary-actuary of the Retirement Board of the San Francisco City and County Employees’ Retirement System. … As was said in Hennessy v. Hall, 14 Cal. App. 759, 762 [ 113 Pac. 350 ], “there is an obvious and material distinction between showing a fact and stating it”. See, also, Irving v. Superior Court, 79 Cal.