Case law

People v. Lynch

50 Cal. 4th 693 · California Supreme Court · Aug 12, 2010

(Uttecht v. Brown, supra, 551 U.S. at p. 18 ; see Wainwright v. … (Uttecht v. Brown, supra, 551 U.S. at p. 18 .)

People v. Zirbes

6 Cal. 2d 425 · California Supreme Court · May 25, 1936

(People v. Van Cleave, 208 Cal. 295, 300 [ 280 Pac. 983 ]; People v. Darling, 120 Cal. … Upon this subject the District Court of Appeal in the case of People v. Brown, 71 Cal.

People v. Siripongs

45 Cal. 3d 548 · California Supreme Court · Jun 6, 1988

Former CALJIC No. 8.84.2—Brown The jury was also instructed in the unadorned language of former CALJIC No. 8.84.2. As we explained in People v. Brown, supra, 40 Cal.3d 512, 536-544 , and People v. … Neither counsel misled the jury on the first aspect of Brown, supra, 40 Cal.3d 512 .

Velkov v. Superior Court

40 Cal. 2d 289 · California Supreme Court · Feb 20, 1953

(Murrey v. Murrey, 216 Cal. 707, 710 [ 16 P.2d 741 , 85 A.L.R. 1335 ] ; Fox v. Hale & Norcross S. M. Co., 108 Cal. 369 , 424 [ 41 P. 308 ] ; Franklin v. Superior Court, 98 Cal.App.2d 292, 294 [ 220 P.2d 8 ] ; Gerard v. … Disciplinary proceedings are a function of the Supreme Court and, although the board of governors of The State Bar and its local committees technically are not judicial tribunals, their findings are considered to be those

Elliott v. Pardee

149 Cal. 516 · California Supreme Court · Aug 9, 1906

(Barnes v. Glyde, 117 Cal. 1 , [ 48 Pac. 804 ].) But this doctrine of laches cannot be applied in such a case as the present. … (Harpending v. Haight, 39 Cal. 189 , [ 2 Am. Rep. 432 ].)

Kwasnik v. State Bar

50 Cal. 3d 1061 · California Supreme Court · May 31, 1990

(Hightower v. State Bar (1983) 34 Cal.3d 150, 157 [ 193 Cal.Rptr. 153 , 666 P.2d 10 ]; see also, Bus. & Prof. Code, § 481; Konigsberg v. State Bar (1957) 353 U.S. 252, 263 [ 1 L.Ed.2d 810, 819-820 , 77 S.Ct. 722 ].) … (Hightower v.

Pierce v. Merrill

128 Cal. 464 · California Supreme Court · May 3, 1900

Bank v. Smith, 101 Cal. 415 ; Adams v. Wallace, 119 Cal. 67 ; Roberts v. Riddle, 79 Pa. St. 469; Klein v. Kern, 94 Tenn. 34 ; Huff v. Slife, 25 Neb. 448; 13 Am. St. Rep. 497 ; Shropshire v. Smith (Tex. Civ. … Rep. 174 ; Maxwell v. Capehart, 62 Minn. 377 ; Clay v. Edgerton, 19 Ohio St. 549 ; 2 Am. Rep. 422 ; Brown v. Curtiss, 2 N. Y. 225; Coburn v. Brooks, 78 Cal. 443 ; First Nat. Bank v. Babcock, 94 Cal. 96 ; 28 Am. St.

Lind v. Closs

88 Cal. 6 · California Supreme Court · Feb 11, 1891

He called again, between Christmas and Ne\v Year’s, and saw my hus *10 band and myself. … (People v. Benson, 6 Cal. 221 ; 65 Am. Dec. 506 ; People v. Hamilton, 46 Cal. 540 ; People v. Brown, 47 Cal. 447 ; People v. Ardaga, 51 Cal. 371 .)

Steele v. Marsicano

102 Cal. 666 · California Supreme Court · Jun 9, 1894

(Nelson v. Iverson, 17 Ala. 216 . See, also, Burditt v. Hunt, 25 Me. 422 ; 43 Am. Dec. 289 .) In Parker v. … (See, also, Frome v. Dennis, 45 N. J. L. 515; Loring v. Mulcahy, 3 Allen, 575 ; Gurley v. Armstead, 148 Mass. 267 ; 12 Am. St. Rep. 555 .)

Donovan v. Oakland & Berkely Rapid Transit Co.

102 Cal. 245 · California Supreme Court · Apr 21, 1894

We built the whole road under the franchise granted by the board of supervisors.” I think the granting of the nonsuit was an error. … (See, also, Williams v. Fresno etc. Co., 96 Cal. 14 ; 31 Am. St. Rep. 172 ; Colgrove v.

Cole v. Roebling Construction Co.

156 Cal. 443 · California Supreme Court · Nov 6, 1909

(See Thompson v. Johnson, 60 Cal. 292; Rheinhart v. Lugo, 86 Cal. 399 , [ 21 Am. St. Rep. 52 , 24 Pac. 1089]; Witter v. Bachman, 117 Cal. 319 , [49 Pac. 202]; Woodward v. Brown, 119 Cal. 304 , [ 63 Am. St. … Rep. 108 , 51 Pac. 2 , 542]; Linott v. Rowland, 119 Cal. 452, 453 , [ 51 Pac. 687 ]; Riverside Co. v. Stockman, 124 Cal. 224 , [ 56 Pac. 1027 ]; Tappendorff v. Moranda, 134 Cal. 421 , [ 66 Pac. 491 ].)

Thompson v. Superior Court of San Francisco

119 Cal. 538 · California Supreme Court · Jan 6, 1898

Amongst numerous authorities supporting this-proposition may be instanced Koontz v. Northern Bank, 16 Wall. 196 ; Hackley v. Draper, 60 N. Y. 88 ; Requa v. Rea, 2 Paige, 339 ; Strong v. Catton, 1 Wis. 471 ; Anderson v. … . & G. 346; Gordon v. Saunders, 2 McCord Eq. 151 ; *543 Brown v. Gilmor, 8 Md. 322 ; Collier v. Whipple, 13 Wend. 224 ; White v. Wilson, 14 Ves. Jr. 151; Houston v. Aycock, 5 Sneed, 406 ; 73 Am.

Smith v. Phœnix Insurance

91 Cal. 323 · California Supreme Court · Sep 21, 1891

(Laffan v. Naglee, 9 Cal. 663 ; 70 Am. Dec. 678 ; De Rutte v. Muldrow, 16 Cal. 505 ; Hall v. Center, 40 Cal. 63 ; Dowd v. Clarke, 54 Cal. 48 ; King v. Buckman, 21 N. J. Eq. 599.) … In Richter v.

People v. Milner

122 Cal. 171 · California Supreme Court · Sep 26, 1898

On the bank was lying a wet piece of board, which, glistening in the *175 sun, Milner thought was Dar rail’s rifle. Darrah moved away, approaching the piece of board. Milner shouted to him not to pick up the gun. … (People v. Westlake, 62 Cal. 303 ; People v. Smith, 93 Cal. 445 .)

Fields v. Sanders

29 Cal. 2d 834 · California Supreme Court · Mar 25, 1947

Likewise, in Andrews v. … (Gordoy v. Flaherty, 9 Cal.2d 716 [ 72 P.2d 538 ]; Peccolo v. City of Los Angeles, 8 Cal.2d 532 [ 66 P.2d 651 ]; Kish v. California State Automobile Assn., 190 Cal. 246 [ 212 P. 27 ] ; Martinelli v.

Thorn v. California Academy of Sciences

183 Cal. 512 · California Supreme Court · Aug 12, 1920

The Louisiana case was approvingly cited in Baker v. Brown, 83 Miss. 793 , [1 Ann. … The learned court, however, also based its decision on McMichael v. Bankston , expressly approving the doctrine thereof.

De La Torre v. CashCall, Inc.

236 Cal. Rptr. 3d 353 · California Supreme Court · Aug 13, 2018

(Bonnell v. Medical Board (2003) 31 Cal.4th 1255, 1265; Larkin, supra, 62 Cal.4th at p. 158.) … Brown and Joanna S. McCallum for Defendant and Respondent. Morrison & Foerster, James R. McGuire and Nancy R.

Dow v. Sunset Telephone & Telegraph Co.

157 Cal. 182 · California Supreme Court · Jan 4, 1910

(McKay v. Southern Bell Tel. Co., 111 Ala. 337 , [ 56 Am. St. Rep. 59 , 19 South. 695 , 31 L. R. A. 589]; Brown v. Consolidated etc. Power Co., (Mo.) 109 S. W. 1032 ; Hebert v. Lake Charles etc. … (Sappenfield v. Main St. R. R. Co., 91 Cal. 48 , [ 27 Pac. 590 ]; Limberg v. Lumber Co., 127 Cal. 604 , [ 60 Pac. 176 ]; Helling v. Schindler, 145 Cal. 313 , [ 78 Pac. 710 ].)

Brock v. Superior Court

12 Cal. 2d 605 · California Supreme Court · Jan 24, 1939

(Bueneman v. City of Santa Barbara, 8 Cal. (2d) 405, 407 [ 65 Pac. (2d) 884 , 109 A. L. R. 895]; Jones v. City of Los Angeles, 211 Cal. 304 [ 295 Pac. 14 ]; Wheeler v. Herbert, 152 Cal. 224 [ 92 Pac. 353 ]; Schofield v. … Board of Supervisors, 189 Cal. 254 [ 208 Pac. 304 ]; Mordecai v. Board of Supervisors, 183 Cal. 434 [ 192 Pac. 40 ].)

People v. Santana

56 Cal. 4th 999 · California Supreme Court · Jun 10, 2013

(See People v. … (See People v.