Case law

Pryal v. Pryal

7 Cal. Unrep. 134 · California Supreme Court · Mar 5, 1903

The case of Burkett v. Burkett, 78 Cal. 310 , 12 Am. St. Rep. 58 , 3 L. R. … Proc., sec. 434; Brown v. Martin, 25 Cal. 91 ; People v. Broadway Wharf Co., 31 Cal. 34 ; Manning v. Dallas, 73 Cal. 420 , 15 Pac. 34 ; Reagan v. Justice’s Court, 75 Cal. 255 , 17 Pac. 195 .

In Re Estate of Tooley

170 Cal. 164 · California Supreme Court · May 12, 1915

The correct rule- is clearly stated in Board etc. v. Culp, 151 Pa. … Rep. 495 , 29 Pac. 282 ] ; McMurry v. Stanley, 69 Tex. 231 , [ 6 S. W. 412 ]; Stewart v. Stewart, 61 N. J. Eq. 28, [ 47 Atl. 633 ]; Weber v. Bryant, 161 Mass. 403 , [ 37 N.

Ivanhoe Irrigation District v. All Parties & Persons

53 Cal. 2d 692 · California Supreme Court · Feb 29, 1960

Dist. v. … As was said in Simpson v.

Kidd v. Laird

15 Cal. 161 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1860

“If there be two issues,” says Washington, J. in Lonsdale v. Brown, ( 4 Wash. C. … (Burt v. Sternburgh, 4 Cow. 559 ; Gardner v. Buckbee, 3 Id. 120.)

People v. McGregar

88 Cal. 140 · California Supreme Court · Feb 28, 1891

In Brady v. Page, 59 Cal. 52 , and Whiting v. … In State v. Ruth, 14 Mo.

Kisbey v. State of California

36 Cal. 3d 415 · California Supreme Court · Jul 12, 1984

. *416 COUNSEL Hoberg, Finger, Brown, Cox & Molligan, Phillip E. Brown and David W. Moyer for Plaintiff and Appellant. George Deukmejian, Attorney General, Michael Franchetti, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Willard A. … (See Ramos v. County of Madera, supra, 4 Cal.3d at p. 692 .)

Lankershim Ranch Land & Water Co.v. Herberger

82 Cal. 600 · California Supreme Court · Jan 29, 1890

Code, sec. 323; Mitchell v. Beckman, 64 Cal. 117 .) … (Jennings v.

County of Butte v. Dept. of Water Resources

California Supreme Court · Aug 1, 2022

(Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 564.) … Significantly, the Ninth Circuit addressed and rejected the very approach to preemption adopted in the majority opinion: “The [Water] Board urges that we read California v.

Rapp v. Gibson

51 Cal. 2d 467 · California Supreme Court · Feb 2, 1959

Plaintiff, the auditor of Kern County, brought this action for declaratory relief against all of the incumbent elective officers of that county to determine the effective date of a salary ordinance adopted by the Board of … (United States v. Sanders, 7 U.S.C.M.A. 21 , 21 C.M.R. 147, 148 .)

Brooks v. City of Gilroy

219 Cal. 766 · California Supreme Court · Jan 30, 1934

It is true that in the resolution of the board and in other documents, he is referred to as “city engineer”, but such language is not always controlling. … The same question was before the court in the case of Kennedy v.

In Re Gallego

77 Cal. Rptr. 2d 132 · California Supreme Court · Aug 3, 1998

Petitioner’s judgment of conviction and sentence of death was affirmed on appeal in 1990 (People v. … Petitioner asserts that his “plenary” investigation was required by McCleskey v.

Stockton v. Common Council of Stockton

41 Cal. 147 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1871

The State Board of Judges, 88 Cal. … Board of Supervisors of Polk County.

Apra v. Aureguy

55 Cal. 2d 827 · California Supreme Court · May 22, 1961

(Meyer v. State Board of Equalization, 42 Cal.2d 376, 381 [2] [ 267 P.2d 257 ]; Moore v. Wood, 26 Cal.2d 621, 629 [5] et seq. [ 160 P.2d 772 ] ; Estate of Platt, 21 Cal.2d 343, 352 [4] [ 131 P.2d 825 ].) … Gas Co. v. Yentura etc.

Weaver v. Howatt

171 Cal. 302 · California Supreme Court · Nov 5, 1915

In Brown v. Yarraham etc. Co., 3 Cal. … Other cases to the same effect are Bellas v. Levan, 4 Watts (Pa.), 294; Salmon v. Dusenbury, 110 Pa. 452 , [ 1 Atl. 635 ] ; Grier v. Pennsylvania C. Co., 128 Pa. 99 , [ 18 Atl. 480 ]; Cain v.

Estate of Marre

18 Cal. 2d 184 · California Supreme Court · Jun 27, 1941

(Brown v. Knapp, 79 N.Y. 136, 142 ; Reid v. Dodge, 44 App. D. C. 558, 562; Note 70 A.L.R. 636 , 638.) … (Hallinan v. Hearst, 133 Cal. 645, 648 [ 66 P. 17 , 55 L.R.A. 216 ]; Cromwell v.

People v. Lopez

255 Cal. Rptr. 3d 526 · California Supreme Court · Nov 25, 2019

(Board of Ed. of Independent School Dist. No. 92 of Pottawatomie Cty. v. Earls (2002) 536 U.S. 822, 837.) But the Fourth Amendment does require law enforcement to act reasonably. … In particular, Arturo D. relied on a Ninth Circuit case, United States v. Brown (9th Cir. 1972) 470 F.2d 1120, 1122, and cases that preceded or relied on Brown (Kendrick v.

People v. Moya

53 Cal. 2d 819 · California Supreme Court · Mar 11, 1960

In addition to the matters urged in People v. … (People v. Duncan, ante , p. 803; People v. Baldonado, post, p. 824 [ 3 Cal.Rptr. 363 , 350 P.2d 115 ].)

Rounthwaite v. Rounthwaite

6 Cal. Unrep. 878 · California Supreme Court · Mar 17, 1902

In the present ease some *881 evidence of plaintiff was oral, and substantially all of defendant’s was of that character: See Reay v. Butler, 95 Cal. 206 , 30 Pac. 208 ; Priest v. … Brown, 100 Cal. 626 , 35 Pac. 323 ; Knox v. Moses, 104 Cal. 502 , 38 Pac. 318 .

Younger v. Jensen

26 Cal. 3d 397 · California Supreme Court · Jan 31, 1980

(Speegle v. Board of Fire Underwriters (1946) 29 Cal.2d 34, 51 [ 172 P.2d 867 ]; R. E. Spriggs v. … Chicago Board of Trade (1947) 331 U.S. 247, 255-256 [ 91 L.Ed. 1468, 1473-1474 , 67 S.Ct. 1160 ].)

Scott v. Industrial Accident Commission

9 Cal. 2d 315 · California Supreme Court · Jul 27, 1937

The evidence showed that the foot-board was worn and a bolt exposed for a distance of four or five inches, so that it might be said to have been in a defective and unsafe condition within the meaning of the Boiler Inspection … Cannon, 296 Fed. 302 ; Shauberger v. Erie R. Co., 25 Fed. (2d) 297; Chicago Junction Ry. Co. v. Industrial Board, 277 Ill. 512 [ 115 N. E. 647 ].