Case law

Shell Oil Co. v. State Board of Equalization

64 Cal. 2d 713 · California Supreme Court · Jun 6, 1966

Brown v. … Co. v. State Board of Equalization, supra, 136 Cal.App.2d 577, 583 ; see Richfield Oil Corp. v. State Board of Equalization, supra, 329 U.S. 69, 83 .)

Western Oil & Gas Assn. v. Air Resources Board

37 Cal. 3d 502 · California Supreme Court · Dec 17, 1984

(Hough v. McCarthy (1960) 54 Cal.2d 273, 280 [ 5 Cal.Rptr. 668 , 353 P.2d 276 ].) When, as here, “recommendations” is coupled with the mandatory “shall” (Gov. Code, § 14; Governing Board v. … Com. v. Agri. etc.

Spring Valley Water Works v. Board of Supervisors

61 Cal. 3 · California Supreme Court · Jun 6, 1881

(Shields v. Ohio, 95 U. S. 325 .) … (Miller v. The State, 15 Wall. 478 ; Holyoke Water Co. v. Lyman, id. 511 .)

General Foundry Service v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

42 Cal. 3d 331 · California Supreme Court · Aug 4, 1986

The Board has considered the issue of a reservation of jurisdiction in a number of cases involving progressive diseases. In Piedemonte v. … (Piedemonte v.

People ex rel. Cobb v. Board of Supervisors

28 Cal. 228 · California Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1865

A bill for the amount wms duly presented to the Board of Supervisors of said county, and the said Board requested by said company to allow the same, and direct it to be paid out of the funds of said county. … And it is out of these revenues, which are under the control of the Board of *232 Supervisors, that they must make all appropriations for expenditures, which are incurred under the exclusive direction of the Board, unless

Subsequent Injuries Fund v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

2 Cal. 3d 56 · California Supreme Court · Feb 26, 1970

, hereinafter the Board). … Fund v. Ind. Acc. Com. (Patterson) supra, 39 Cal.2d 83 ; State of Cal. v. Industrial Acc. Com. (Clubb) (1957) 155 Cal. App.2d 288 [ 318 P.2d 34 ]; Subsequent Injuries Fund v. I.A.C.

Avalon Bay Foods v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

77 Cal. Rptr. 2d 552 · California Supreme Court · Aug 20, 1998

The board’s interpretation of statutes involving the workers’ compensation laws are “entitled to significant respect upon judicial review.” (Nicklesberg v. Workers’ Comp. … Such has, in fact, been the prevailing practice of the board, as reflected in its relevant decisions. Thus, Smith v. ESIS, Inc. (1996) SBA 74576, 74580, 24 Cal. Workers’ Comp.

Fitch v. Board of Supervisors of San Francisco

122 Cal. 285 · California Supreme Court · Oct 17, 1898

The evident purpose of the section is to provide a penalty by way of punishment for the delinquency of the board. … In whatever terms the failure of the board to pass the ordinance in February may be characterized, such failure, aside from the rights of a party who may compel action by the board, is an offense against the entire state,

Heavey v. State Bar

17 Cal. 3d 553 · California Supreme Court · Jul 19, 1976

We also agree with the board that petitioner is culpable for failing to send to opposing counsel copies of the letters written to Judge Brown. … Judge Brown.

Aarons v. Board of Medical Examiners

31 Cal. 2d 863 · California Supreme Court · Dec 2, 1947

This is a companion case to Mann v. Board of Medical Examiners, ante, p. 30 [ 187 P.2d 1 ], this day decided, and also to Burroughs v. Board of Medical Examiners, post, p. 864 [ 187 P.2d 9 ].

Burroughs v. Board of Medical Examiners

31 Cal. 2d 864 · California Supreme Court · Dec 2, 1947

This is a companion case to Mann v. Board of Medical Examiners, ante, p. 30 [ 187 P.2d 1 ], this day decided, and also to Aarons v. Board of Medical Examiners, ante, p. 863 [ 187 P.2d 8 ].

Richmond School District v. Board of Supervisors

165 Cal. 555 · California Supreme Court · Jun 3, 1913

Kaiser Steel Corp. v. State Board of Equalization

24 Cal. 3d 188 · California Supreme Court · May 8, 1979

(People v. Puritan Ice Co. (1944) 24 Cal.2d 645 [ 151 P.2d 1 ]; Good Humor Co. v. State Board of Equal. (1957) 152 Cal.App.2d 873 [ 313 P.2d 640 ]; Am. Distilling Co. v. … State Bd. of Equalization (1942) 55 Cal.App.2d 799 [ 131 P.2d 609 ]; Kirk v. Johnson (1940) 37 Cal.App.2d 224 [ 99 P.2d 279 ]; People v. Monterey Ice & Dev.

Pasadena Junior College District v. Board of Supervisors

216 Cal. 61 · California Supreme Court · Jul 25, 1932

Respondents have cited four cases in support of their assertion that the Board of Supervisors has no right or authority to make such relevy. The earliest of these cases is Board of Education v. … The next case cited is the case of Board of Education v. Common Council, 1 Cal. App. 311 [ 82 Pac. 89 ]. The opinion therein is very brief. It simply follows Board of Education v.

Kaiser Foundation Hospitals v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

13 Cal. 3d 20 · California Supreme Court · Dec 5, 1974

Co. v. Industrial Acc. … Co. v. Ind. Acc. Com., supra, 38 Cal.2d 599, 605 ; Garcia v.

Tieberg v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board

2 Cal. 3d 931 · California Supreme Court · Jul 30, 1970

Lassie filed a petition for reassessment with the Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board (hereafter called the board) contending that the writers were independent contractors. … In Bartels v.

State Board of Chiropractic Examiners v. Superior Court

201 Cal. 108 · California Supreme Court · Apr 22, 1927

In Suckow v. … Riley, 187 Cal. 121 [ 200 Pac. 1042 ]; Anderson v. Board of Dental Examiners, 27 Cal. App. 336 [ 149 Pac. 1006 ]; Dyment v. Board of Medical Examiners, 57 Cal. App. 260 [ 207 Pac. 409 ].)

Johnston v. Board of Supervisors of Glenn County

104 Cal. 390 · California Supreme Court · Oct 5, 1894

Co. v. Placer *394 County, 34 Cal. 361 ; 46 Cal. 670 ; Buckley v. Superior Court, 96 Cal. 119 ; Farmers’ etc Bank v. Board etc., 97 Cal. 327 .) … In this case it does not appear that any part of the testimony of the ten witnesses that appear to have testified before the board was reduced to writing; and though the clerk of the board, W. H.

City of Pomona v. State Board of Equalization

53 Cal. 2d 305 · California Supreme Court · Dec 23, 1959

judicially construed as “not a tax on the sale or because of the sale but ... an excise tax for the privilege of conducting a retail business measured by the gross receipts from sales. ’ ’ (Livingston Rock & Gravel Co. v. … In the agreements which the cities and county entered into with the Board of Equalization for the board’s administration of the local sales taxes, the cities and county agreed that “the Board shall prescribe and adopt such

South Coast Framing, Inc. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

61 Cal. 4th 291 · California Supreme Court · May 28, 2015

The employer petitioned the Workers‟ Compensation Appeals Board (Board) for reconsideration, arguing no substantial evidence supported the WCJ‟s causation finding. … “Judicial review of the Board‟s decision on factual matters is limited to determining whether the decision, based on the entire record, is supported by substantial evidence.” (Guerra v. Workers’ Comp.