Case law

Story & Isham Commercial Co. v. Story

100 Cal. 30 · California Supreme Court · Oct 10, 1893

(See, also, Xenia Branch Bank v. Lee, 7 Abb. Pr. 372 ; Ritchie v. Hayward, 71 Mo. 560 ; Judah v. Trustees, 16 Ind. 60 .) … (Pomeroy on Remedies, sec. 772; Gordon v. Bruner, 49 Mo. 570 ; Brady v. Brennan, 25 Minn. 210 ; Bitting v. Thaxton, 72 N. C. 549 ; Thompson v. Kessel, 30 N. Y. 383 ; Chandler v. Childs, 42 Mich. 128 .)

Shoemaker v. Acker

116 Cal. 239 · California Supreme Court · Mar 10, 1897

(Sutherland on Damages, 2d ed., secs. 64, 72, 107, 120; Masterton v. Mayor, 7 Hill, 61 ; 42 Am. Dec. 38 ; United States v. Behan, 110 U. S. 344 ; Rice v. Whitmore, 74 Cal. 619 ; Hale v. Trout, 35 Cal. 229 ; Stoddard v. … Code, sec. 1768; Blackwood v. Cutting etc. Co., 76 Cal. 212 ; 9 Am. St. Rep. 199 ; Brown v.

People v. Blacksher

52 Cal. 4th 769 · California Supreme Court · Aug 25, 2011

Before his scheduled release in the summer of 1986, the Board of Prison Terms ordered a mental health evaluation. … (People v. Barnwell, supra, 41 Cal.4th 1038, 1059; People v. Brown, supra, 33 Cal.4th 382, 402.)

Buckeye Refining Co. v. Kelly

163 Cal. 8 · California Supreme Court · Jun 6, 1912

(Hogan v. Black, 66 Cal. 41 , [ 4 Pac. 943 ] ; Dodd v. Brott, 1 Minn. 270 , [ 66 Am. Dec. 541 ] ; Frissell v. Haile, 18 Mo. 18 ; Chicago C. Ry. Co. v. Blanchard, 37 Ill. App. 391 ; McCarver v. Nealey, 1 G. … (Brown v. Mann, 71 Cal. 192 , [ 12 Pac. 51 ] ; Byrne v. Byrne, 94 Cal. 576 , [ 29 Pac. 1115 , 30 Pac. 196 ].)

Patterson & Frisbie v. Ely

19 Cal. 28 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1861

In Blake v. … Code, 1852, sec. 171; Vanhorn v. Montgomery, 5 How. 238 ; Davis v. Potter, 4 Id. 155; Mott v. Burnett, 1 Code R. [N. S.] 225; Waggoner v. Brown, 8 How. 212 .)

Stockton Gas & Elec. Co. v. San Joaquin County

148 Cal. 313 · California Supreme Court · Dec 14, 1905

In Dundy v. … In City of *321 Chicago v.

City of Barstow v. Mojave Water Agency

99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 294 · California Supreme Court · Aug 21, 2000

{Jordan v. … (See State of California v.

Hale v. McGettigan

114 Cal. 112 · California Supreme Court · Aug 25, 1896

In Christy v. … Similar principles were announced in People v. McCreery, 34 Cal. 433 , Rood v. McCargar, 49 Cal. 117 , and Mills v. Sargent, 36 Cal. 379 . See, also, Robinson v. Bidwell, 22 Cal. 379 ; Miller v. Kister, 68 Cal. 142 .

Brokaw v. Black-Foxe Military Institute

37 Cal. 2d 274 · California Supreme Court · May 25, 1951

Co. v. … (Brown v. Regan, 10 Cal.2d 519 [ 75 P.2d 1063 ].) Moreover, throughout the trial the mother was treated as a plaintiff without regard to which action was involved. The actions were tried as one action.

People ex rel. Flynn v. Abbott

16 Cal. 358 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1860

The object was to protect the commerce of San Francisco against the dangers of the harbor, and for that purpose provision was made for the organization of a Board of Pilot Commissioners, and the appointment of a sufficient … (See Palmer v. Woodbury, 14 Cal. 43 .)

Ford Dealers Assn. v. Department of Motor Vehicles

32 Cal. 3d 347 · California Supreme Court · Sep 7, 1982

(Franchise Tax Board v. Superior Court (1950) 36 Cal.2d 538, 549 [ 225 P.2d 905 ]; California Optometric Assn. v. Lackner (1976) 60 Cal.App.3d 500, 505-509 [ 131 Cal.Rptr. 744 ].) … (Webster v. Board of Dental Examiners, supra, 17 Cal.2d at p. 538 .)

Miles v. Ryan

172 Cal. 205 · California Supreme Court · Feb 28, 1916

This was expressly decided in Mayrhofer v. Board of Education, 89 Cal. 110 , [ 23 Am. St. Rep. 451 , 26 P. 646 ]. … Bank v. Perris Irr. Dist., 107 Cal. 55 , [ 40 P. 45 ]; Newport Wharf L. Co. v. Drew, 125 Cal. 585 , [ 58 P. 187 ]; Long Beach School Dist. v. Lutge, 129 Cal. 409 , [ 62 P. 36 ].)

Shaeffer v. State Bar

26 Cal. 2d 739 · California Supreme Court · Jul 13, 1945

, ordered by this court on April 30, 1934 (Shaeffer v. … The board having found against petitioner on nine counts recommended suspension for a period of two years.

Cassista v. Community Foods, Inc.

5 Cal. 4th 1050 · California Supreme Court · Sep 2, 1993

Board, of Civil Service Comrs., supra, 5 Cal.App.4th 1011 , the department’s weight standards were bona fide occupational qualifications. (McMillen v. … And the recent decision of the California Court of Appeal in Hegwer v. Board of Civil Service Comrs., supra, 5 Cal.App.4th 1011, is in accord.

People v. Hart

85 Cal. Rptr. 2d 132 · California Supreme Court · Jul 21, 1999

Brown (1985) 40 Cal.3d 512 [ 230 Cal.Rptr. 834 , 726 P.2d 516 ], reversed on other grounds, California v. … (See People v. Brown (1988) 46 Cal.3d 432, 449 [ 250 Cal.Rptr. 604 , 758 P.2d 1135 ].) *654 L.

Landeros v. Flood

17 Cal. 3d 399 · California Supreme Court · Jun 30, 1976

(Brown v. Colm (1974) 11 Cal.3d 639, 642-643 [ 114 Cal.Rptr. 128 , 522 P.2d 688 ]; Bardessono v. Michels (1970) 3 Cal.3d 780, 788 [ 91 Cal.Rptr. 760 , 478 P.2d 480 , 45 A.L.R.3d 717 ]; Lawless v. … (Sinz v. Owens (1949) 33 Cal.2d 749, 753 [ 205 P.2d 3 , 8 A.L.R.2d 757 ]; accord, Brown v. Colm (1974) supra, 11 Cal.3d 639, 643 ; Cobbs v.

Archer v. Civil Service Commission

1 Cal. 2d 357 · California Supreme Court · Jul 27, 1934

Petitioner, in February, 1927, was employed by the city and county of San Francisco in the bureau of engineering of the board of public works, in the capacity of engineering draftsman. … The case of Cutting v. McKinley, 130 Cal.

Castellanos v. State of California

California Supreme Court · Jul 25, 2024

(Cf., e.g., People v. Rojas (2023) 15 Cal.5th 561, 568; People v. Kelly (2010) 47 Cal.4th 1008, 1025–1026; People v. Cooper (2002) 27 Cal.4th 38, 44.) … Name of Opinion Castellanos v.

In Re Estate of Shirley

180 Cal. 400 · California Supreme Court · May 27, 1919

In support of this construction of the clause she relies on the decisions of this court in Estate of Marti, 132 Cal. 666 , [ 61 Pac. 964 , 64 Pac. 1071 ]; Kauffman v. … In Board v. Culp, 151 Pa. 470 , [ 25 Atl. 118 ], quoted with approval in Estate of Tooley, 170 Cal. 166 , [Ann.

Daves v. Southern Pacific Co.

98 Cal. 19 · California Supreme Court · Mar 27, 1893

(Collier v. Steinhart, 51 Cal. 116 .)” In Congrave v. S. P. P. R. … The same doctrine was announced in Brown v. Central Pacific R. R. Co., 72 Cal. 523 ; and Fagundes v. Central Pacific R. R. Co., 79 Cal. 97 .”