Case law

Rattray v. Scudder

28 Cal. 2d 214 · California Supreme Court · May 21, 1946

(See Sipper v. Urban, 22 Cal.2d 138 [ 137 P.2d 425 ]; Russell v. Miller, 21 Cal.2d 817 [ 136 P.2d 318 ]; Dare v. Medical Examiners, 21 Cal.2d 790 [ 136 P.2d 304]; Laisne v. California St. … As said in the case of Smith v.

Lee v. Superior Court of L.A. Cty.

91 Cal. Rptr. 2d 509 · California Supreme Court · Jan 6, 2000

(See Camren v. State (Okla.Crim.App. 1991) 815 P.2d 1194, 1195 [“[t]he plain language” of a statute similar to section 529 covers impersonation of the deceased]; see also People v. … That issue currently is pending before this court in People v. Rathert * (Cal.App.)

Steele v. Steele

124 Cal. 533 · California Supreme Court · May 29, 1899

In Packard v. … (Citing Easterbrooks v. Tillinghast, 5 Gray, 17 ; Ackroyd v. Smithson, 1 Brown Ch. 503; Cox v. Parker, 22 Beav. 168. See, also, 1 Perry on Trusts, 4th ed., sec. 160.)

Lee v. Southern Pacific Railroad

116 Cal. 97 · California Supreme Court · Feb 19, 1897

(Arrowsmith v. Nashville etc. R. R. Co., 57 Fed. Rep. 165; Thomas v. Railroad Co., 101 U. S. 83 ; New York etc. R. R. Co. v. Winans, 17 How. 30 ; Railroad Co. v. Brown, 17 Wall. 445 ; Frazier v. … Co. v. Dunbar, 20 Ill. 623 ; 71 Am. Dec. 291 ; Central etc. R. R. Co. v. Morris, supra; Nelson v. Vermont etc. R. R. Co., 26 Vt. 717 ; 62 Am. Dec. 614 .)

People v. Grimes

California Supreme Court · Jan 5, 2015

.‖ (People v. Abilez (2007) 41 Cal.4th 472, 525–526, italics added; see Brown, supra, at p. 448.) … Brown (1988) 46 Cal.3d 432, 448 (Brown).)

Forsyth v. San Joaquin Light & Power Corp.

208 Cal. 397 · California Supreme Court · Oct 22, 1929

Western Maryland Dairy, 150 Md. 641 [ 135 Atl. 136 ]; Doskovitch v. Board of Public Utility Commrs., 103 N. J. L. 570 [ 138 Atl. 110 ]; Davis v. People, 79 Colo. 642 [ 247 Pac. 801, 802 ]. … The case of Doskovitch v. Board of Public Utility Commrs., supra, involved the construction of a section of Kates Act, passed by the legislature of the state of New Jersey (P. L. 1916, p. 283; P.

Chapman v. Polack

70 Cal. 487 · California Supreme Court · Aug 27, 1886

(Bates v. Ill. C. R. R. Co., 1 Black, 207 .) By the plats of public surveys, lands must be identified and boundaries ascertained in all cases of the kind. (Brown’s Lessee v. Clements, 3 How. 671 ; Gazzam v. … (Vance v. Fore, 24 Cal. 436 ; Mayo v. Mazeaux, 38 Cal. 442 ; Serrano v. Rawson, 47 Cal. 52 ; Black v. Sprague, 54 Cal. 266 .) As was said in Vance v.

Swamp Land District No. 307 v. Gwynn

70 Cal. 566 · California Supreme Court · Aug 31, 1886

(People v. Coghill, 47 Cal. 361 ; People v. Hagar, 49 Cal. 229 .) Now they are not required to act jointly in viewing the lands. It is sufficient if, as they did here, two go together and the other alone to view it. … (People v. Coghill, 47 Cal. 361 ; People v. Hagar, 49 Cal. 229 ; People v. Ahern, 52 Cal. 208 .)

Harris v. Glens Falls Insurance

6 Cal. 3d 699 · California Supreme Court · Feb 25, 1972

(Century Bank v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. (1971) 4 Cal.3d 319, 325 [ 93 Cal.Rptr. 569 , 482 P.2d 193 ]; Gray v. Zurich Insurance Co. (1966) 65 Cal.2d 263, 269 [ 54 Cal.Rptr. 104 , 419 P.2d 168 ].) … Comp. & Fire Co. v. Ind. Acc. Com. (1965) 62 Cal.2d 532, 534 [ 42 Cal.Rptr. 845 , 399 P.2d 381 ].)

Russell v. Pacific Can Co.

116 Cal. 527 · California Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1897

And the principle in the case here under consideration is no different than if injury to this plaintiff had been produced by the giving way of the boards of the closet, or the caving in of the vault. … As defining the duty of the master to his servant, the court of appeals of New York, in Ryan v. Fowler, 24 N. Y. 414 , 82 Am.

Reclamation District No. 108 v. West

129 Cal. 622 · California Supreme Court · Sep 4, 1900

By section 3456 of the Political Code power is given to make assessments proportionate to the whole expense “and to the benefits which will result from such works”; and by section 3454 the board is given power, in its discretion … No. 3 v. Goldman, 65 Cal. 635 , and Lower Kings River etc. Dist. v. Phillips, 108 Cal. 306 . I do not think that there are any other grounds for reversing the judgment, and think that it should be affirmed.

People v. Cook

41 Cal. 3d 373 · California Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1985

Brown (1979) 88 Cal.App.3d 283, 289-292 [ 151 Cal.Rptr. 749 ].) … Others, such as Triggs, Krivda, Stoner, and Brown , all supra, suggest that one may expect some casual public observation without necessarily consenting to police surveillance.

Jones v. Tracy School District

27 Cal. 3d 99 · California Supreme Court · May 12, 1980

(Fry v. Board of Education (1941) 17 Cal.2d 753, 761 [ 112 P.2d 229 ] [teacher’s pay improperly withheld because of reduced job classification]; Dryden v. … Board of Pension Commrs. (1936) 6 Cal.2d 575, 580-581 [ 59 P.2d 104 ] [policeman’s pension benefits unlawfully withheld]; Raymond v.

Patton v. Patton

32 Cal. 2d 520 · California Supreme Court · Sep 1, 1948

Code, §§ 3268, 3513; Chesney v. Bryam, 15 Cal.2d 460 [ 101 P.2d 1106 ]; Leonard v. Board of Education, 36 Cal.App.2d 595 [ 97 P.2d 1032 ].) … (Kellett v. Kellett, 2 Cal.2d 45 [ 39 P.2d 203 ]; White v. White, 86 Cal. 212 [24 P.1030]; Sharon v. Sharon, 75 Cal. 1 [ 16 P. 345 ]; Falk v. Falk, 48 Cal.App.2d 780 [ 120 P.2d 724 ].)

Berliner v. Travelers' Insurance Co.

121 Cal. 458 · California Supreme Court · Jul 18, 1898

Co. v. Crandall, 120 U. … Co. v. Brown, 123 Ill. 186 ; 5 Am. St. Rep. 510 ; McGee v. Missouri Pac. Ry. Co., 92 Mo. 208 ; 1 Am. St. Rep. 706 ; Nashville etc. R. R. Co. v. Irwin, 3 Am. & Eng. R. R. Cas. 465.

Employers' Liability Assurance Corp. v. Industrial Accident Commission

187 Cal. 615 · California Supreme Court · Dec 21, 1921

(Carstens v. Pillsbury, 172 Cal. 572 , [ 158 Pac. 218 ] ; Pacific G. & E. Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com., 180 Cal. 497, *618 [ 181 Pac. 788 ].) … Co. v. Van Loben Sels et al., 173 Cal. 228 , [ 159 Pac. 600 ] ; Shaughnessy v. American Surety Co., 138 Cal. 543 , [ 69 Pac. 250 , 71 Pac. 701 ]; Coburn v. Townsend, 103 Cal. 233 , [ 37 Pac. 202 ].)

Neet v. Holmes

19 Cal. 2d 605 · California Supreme Court · Feb 26, 1942

In Turlock Theatre v. … The defendants’ attempt to find support in the case of Brown Materials Co. v. Angus, 20 Cal.

Willis v. Gordon

20 Cal. 3d 629 · California Supreme Court · Feb 17, 1978

Since this matter will be retried in the post-Zi milieu (Li v. … Flores v. Brown (1952) 39 Cal.2d 622 [ 248 P.2d 922 ], is an example.

Conservatorship of Roulet

23 Cal. 3d 219 · California Supreme Court · Feb 6, 1979

(E.g., Reed v. Reed (1971) 404 U.S. 71, 75-76 [ 30 L.Ed.2d 225, 229-230 , 92 S.Ct. 251 ]; Brown v. Merlo (1973) 8 Cal.3d 855, 861 [ 106 Cal.Rptr. 388 , 506 P.2d 212 , 66 A.L.R.3d 505 ]; Purdy & Fitzpatrick v. … (E.g., Rinaldi v. Yeager (1966) 384 U.S. 305, 308-309 [ 16 L.Ed.2d 577, 579-580 , 86 S.Ct. 1497 ]; Brown v. Merlo, supra, at p. 861 ; Hayes v.

La Mesa Homes Co. v. La Mesa Lemon Grove & Spring Valley Irr. Dist.

173 Cal. 121 · California Supreme Court · Jul 25, 1916

(Board of Directors etc. v. Tregea, 88 Cal. 334 , [ 26 Pac. 237 ].) In re Madera Irrigation District, 92 Cal. 296, 343 , [ 27 Am. St. Rep. 106 , 14 L. R. A. 755, 28 Pac. 272, 675 ], is authority for the same principle. … One of these is Pixley v.