Case law

People v. Engelman

121 Cal. Rptr. 2d 862 · California Supreme Court · Jul 18, 2002

Castro (1986) 184 Cal.App.3d 849, 851 [ 229 Cal.Rptr. 280 ]; People v. Brown (1976) 61 Cal.App.3d 476, 478-479 [ 132 Cal.Rptr. 217 ]; People ex rel. Dept. Pub. Wks. v. … Chin, J., and Brown, J., concurred.

Otto v. Protective

75 Cal. 308 · California Supreme Court · Mar 21, 1888

(Commonwealth v. Pike Benevolent Society, 8 Watts & S. 250 ; Burt v. Grand Lodge F. & A. M., 44 Mich. 208 ; Robinson v. Yates City Lodge, 86 Ill. 598 .) … (Hirschl on Law of Fraternities, 56; Dawkins v. Antrobus, 44 L. T. Rep. 557; Lambert v. Addison, 46 L. T. Rep. 20.)

People v. Johnson

3 Cal. 4th 1183 · California Supreme Court · Nov 30, 1992

He fails to specify how the argument, standing alone, violates Brown. Nonetheless, he argues that the Brown error contained in the argument was “exacerbated” by erroneous instructions. … This interpretation, defendant contends, does not accurately state applicable law and violates the rule of People v. Brown, supra, 40 Cal.3d 512 .

Johnson v. Department of Justice

60 Cal. 4th 871 · California Supreme Court · Jan 29, 2015

“This is particularly true in constitutional cases,” where, as here, “ ‘correction through legislative action is practically impossible.’ ” (Payne, at p. 828; accord, Board of Supervisors v. … (Board of Supervisors v.

Fox v. Tay

89 Cal. 339 · California Supreme Court · May 30, 1891

(Hearst v. Pujol, 44 Cal. 235 ; Janes v. Throckmorton, 57 Cal. 388 ; Broder v. Conklin, 77 Cal. 339 ; Bacon v. Rives, 106 U. S. 99 ; 1 Perry on Trusts, sec. 863.) Mr. … (Barton v. Higgins, 41 Md. 546 ; Brown v. Gas-Light Co., 58 Cal. 426 ; Hall v. Harrison, 21 Mo. 227 ; 64 Am. Dec. 225 .) The case of Lewis v. Adams, 70 Cal. 403 , 59 Am. Dec. 423 , does not hold contrary to this view.

Lakeside Ditch Co. v. Crane

80 Cal. 181 · California Supreme Court · Aug 5, 1889

The statute does not confer upon the board of water commissioners the right to take away the interest which a prior appropriator has in the waters of a stream. … (Oroville & V. R. R. v. Plumas Co., 37 Cal. 361 .)

Chinn v. Gunn

148 Cal. 755 · California Supreme Court · Feb 27, 1906

The case is similar in its facts to that of Johnson v. Gunn, ante, p. 745, [ 84 Pac. 665 ], but it differs in one important particular. … And neither he nor the board of supervisors is authorized to determine the question conclusively.

In Re Marriage of Milhan

13 Cal. 3d 129 · California Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1974

(See Carlson v. … Board of Administration, 3 Cal.3d 32, 46 [ 89 Cal.Rptr. 61 , 473 P.2d 765 ] [state employee’s retirement pension]; Gelfand v. Gelfand, 136 Cal.App. 448, 455-456 [ 29 P.2d 271 ] [insurance policy].)

California Canning Peach Growers v. Williams

11 Cal. 2d 221 · California Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1938

(Verzan v. McGregor, 23 Cal. 339 ; Berry v. Kowalsky, 95 Cal. 134 [ 30 Pac. 202 , 29 Am. St. Rep. 101 ]; Spotton v. Dyer, 42 Cal. App. 585 [184 Pac. 23]; Shelley v. Hart, 112 Cal. … See, also, Shean v. Weeks, 176 Cal. 592 [ 169 Pac. 231 ]; Gianelli v. Globe Grain & Milling Co., 48 Cal. App. 103 [ 191 Pac. 720 ].)

Minton v. Cavaney

56 Cal. 2d 576 · California Supreme Court · Sep 5, 1961

De California v. Resnick, supra, 47 Cal.2d 792, 796, 797 ; Riddle v. Leuschner, supra, 51 Cal.2d at 580 ; Stark v. Coker, 20 Cal.2d 839, 846-849 [ 129 P.2d 390 ]; Shafford v. Otto Sales Co. … Moreover, section 800 of the Corporations Code provides that “. . . the business and affairs of every corporation shall be controlled by, a board of not less than three directors.”

Lukrawka v. Spring Valley Water Co.

169 Cal. 318 · California Supreme Court · Feb 13, 1915

In the case of Bothwell v. Consumers’ Co., 13 Idaho, 568 , [24 L. R A. (N. … (Price v. Riverside L. & I. Co., 56 Cal. 431 ; Hildreth v. Montecito Creek Water Co., 139 Cal. 22 , [ 72 Pac. 395 ]; Fellows v. Los Angeles, 151 Cal. 52 , [90 Pac. 137]; South Pasadena v. Pasadena Land etc.

City of Los Angeles v. Lankershim

160 Cal. 800 · California Supreme Court · Sep 26, 1911

We *802 need do no more than refer to such familiar cases as Ex parte Mirande, 73 Cal. 365 , [ 14 Pac. 888 ]; Abeel v. Clark, 84 Cal. 230 , [ 24 Pac. 383 ; City of Pasadena v. … Stimson, 91 Cal. 238 , [27 Pac. 604]; County of El Dorado v. Meiss, 100 Cal. 268 , [ 34 Pac. 716 ]; Hellman v. Shoulters, 114 Cal. 136 , [ 44 Pac. 915 , 45 Pac. 1057 ]; Van Harlingen v. Doyle, 134 Cal. 53 , [54 L. R.

Jones v. Sanders

138 Cal. 405 · California Supreme Court · Jan 26, 1903

Welch, 128 Mass. 489 ; People v. … Co. v. Brown, 172 Ill. 329 , and other cases).

Mazzera v. Wolf

30 Cal. 2d 531 · California Supreme Court · Aug 19, 1947

Untrecht, 26 Cal.2d 261, 270 [ 158 P.2d 3 ] ; Brown v. Spencer, 163 Cal. 589 [ 126 P. 493 ] ; Couts v. Winston, 153 Cal. 686 [ 96 P. 357 ]) and a resulting trust follows which is also exempt from the statute of frauds. … (Viner v. Untrecht, supra; Watson v. Poore, 18 Cal.2d 302 [ 115 P.2d 478 ].)

Moore v. First Bank of San Luis Obispo

94 Cal. Rptr. 2d 603 · California Supreme Court · Apr 17, 2000

Like the companion case of Moshonov v. … (Moncharsh v. Heily & Blase (1992) 3 Cal.4th 1, 28 [ 10 Cal.Rptr.2d 183 , 832 P.2d 899 ] (Moncharsh); Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. v.

Holmquist v. Kent

219 Cal. 231 · California Supreme Court · Oct 20, 1933

On December 6, 1928, the board of directors in meeting received and read a letter addressed to Mr. … (Randall v. California Land Buyers Syndicate, supra, pp. 597, 598; Western Oil & Refining Co. v. Venago, 218 Cal. 733 [ 24 Pac. (2d) 971 ].) Also, the case of Randall v.

People v. Collins

109 Cal. Rptr. 2d 836 · California Supreme Court · Aug 2, 2001

BROWN, J., Concurring. … Here, unlike the situation in People v.

Frowenfeld v. Hastings

134 Cal. 128 · California Supreme Court · Sep 10, 1901

(Brown v. Dewey, 1 Sand. Ch. 72 .) A lien cannot be enforced for anything other than the thing for which it was given.

People v. Johnson

47 Cal. 3d 1194 · California Supreme Court · Feb 23, 1989

In People v. Brown (1985) 40 Cal.3d 512, 538-545 [ 220 Cal.Rptr. 637 , 709 P.2d 440 ] (revd. on other grounds California v. … Brown (1988) 46 Cal.3d 432, 456 [ 250 Cal.Rptr. 604 , 758 P.2d 1135 ].) 2. Modification of Section 190.3, Factor (f).

People v. Kelly

146 Cal. 119 · California Supreme Court · Jan 30, 1905

Lightfoot, keeper of the boarding-house at which Myrtle, Case, and Kelly put up prior to the commission of the crime; who testified that Case and the defendant registered under the names of Russel and Truan. … (People v. Hickman, 113 Cal. 86 .) 13.