Case law

Garrett v. Swanton

216 Cal. 220 · California Supreme Court · Aug 11, 1932

W. 115 ] ; Bell v. City of Fayette, 325 Mo. 75 [ 28 S. W. (2d) 356 ] ; Kasch v. Miller, 104 Ohio St. 281 [ 135 N. E. 813 ]; McClain v. Regents of University, 124 Or. 629 [ 265 Pac. 412 ] ; Barnes v. … In Shelton v.

McGuire v. Drew

83 Cal. 225 · California Supreme Court · Feb 28, 1890

(Haight v. Green, 19 Cal. 113 ; Mulholland v. Heyneman, 19 Cal. 605 ; Ekel v. Swift, 47 Cal. 619 .) … (Haight v. Green, supra; Mulholland v. Heyneman, supra.) 3.

Burt v. Scarborough

56 Cal. 2d 817 · California Supreme Court · Nov 16, 1961

action in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County for a writ of mandate against the company and its six other directors to compel them to allow her “accompanied by counsel of her choice” to attend meetings of the company’s board … In Stone v.

Merkley v. Merkley

12 Cal. 2d 543 · California Supreme Court · Jan 9, 1939

The plaintiff’s services appeared to consist of boarding Wallace, cooking for hired help, and other general housewifely duties in the home and garden. … The plaintiff relies on Mitau v. Roddan, 149 Cal. 1, 14 [ 84 Pac. 145 , 6 L. R. A. (N.

Levy v. Superior Court

15 Cal. 2d 692 · California Supreme Court · Jul 23, 1940

In Harper v. … v.

Shea v. City of San Bernardino

7 Cal. 2d 688 · California Supreme Court · Nov 19, 1936

(Tompkins v. Clay Street R. R. Co., 66 Cal. 163, 164 [ 4 Pac. 1165 ] ; Drinkhouse v. Van Ness, 202 Cal. 359, 381 [ 260 Pac. 869 ] ; Joyce v. Massachusetts Real Estate Co., 173 Minn. 310 [ 217 N. W. 337 ]; Thomas v. … (Spencer v. Calipatria, 9 Cal. App. (2d) 267 [ 49 Pac. (2d) 320 ] ; Johnson v. Glendale, 12 Cal. App. (2d) 389 [ 55 Pac. (2d) 580 ]; Thompson v. Los Angeles County, 140 Cal. App. 73 [ 35 Pac. (2d) 185 ]; Norton v.

J. Frank & Co. v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.

175 Cal. 293 · California Supreme Court · Jun 6, 1917

(Murray v. Home Benefit Assn., 90 Cal. 402 -407, [ 25 Am. St. Rep. 133 , 27 Pac. 309 ] ; Knarston v. Manhattan Life Ins. Co., 124 Cal. 74 -78, [ 56 Pac. 773 ]; Knarston v. Manhattan Life Ins. … (Carroll v. Girard Fire Ins. Co., 72 Cal. 297 -300, [ 13 Pac. 863 ]; *300 Wheaton v. North British & Mercantile Ins. Co., 76 Cal. 415 -426, [ 9 Am. St. Rep. 216 , 18 Pac. 758 ].)

People v. Kirkes

39 Cal. 2d 719 · California Supreme Court · Oct 17, 1952

(People v. Hidalgo, 78 Cal.App.2d 926, 939, 941-942 [ 179 P.2d 102 ]; People v. Chilcott, 18 Cal.App.2d 583, 588 [ 64 P.2d 450 ] ; People v. Brown, 81 Cal.App. 226, 241 [ 253 P. 735 ].) … (People v. Gingell, 211 Cal. 532, 540 [ 296 P. 70 ] ; People v. Hidalgo, supra, p. 940 ; People v. Rinesmith, 40 Cal.App.2d 786, 792 [ 105 P.2d 1021 ] ; People v. Chilcott, supra, pp. 586-587 ; People v.

Brandenburg v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.

28 Cal. 2d 282 · California Supreme Court · May 31, 1946

On June 11, 1943 plaintiff, his wife, and three small children boarded a streetcar of defendant corporation travelling north on 28th Street in Sacramento. The ear was operated by one man, defendant Colwell. … (Mangan v. Des Moines City Ry. Co., 200 Iowa 597 [ 203 N.W. 705 , 41 A.L.R. 368 ]; see, also, Laurent v. United Railways (Mo.), 191 S.W. 992 ; Elder v. Rutledge, 217 Ind. 459, 469, 470 [ 27 N.E. 2d 358 ]; Heva v.

People v. Williams

52 Cal. Rptr. 3d 268 · California Supreme Court · Dec 28, 2006

(People v. Brown (2003) 31 Cal.4th 518, 573 [ 3 Cal.Rptr.3d 145 , 73 P.3d 1137 ].) We note that defendant is Caucasian. … (People v. Brown, supra, 31 Cal.4th 518, 573 .) Defendant asks us to reconsider our holding in Brown , but provides no persuasive reason for doing so.

Murray v. Murray

115 Cal. 266 · California Supreme Court · Dec 11, 1896

Bank v. … (Pennoyer v. Neff, 95 U. S. 733 ; Brown v. Campbell, 100 Cal. *276 641 ; 38 Am. St. Rep. 314 .)

Estate of Hinckley

58 Cal. 457 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1881

It is my will that when any vacancy occurs in the Board of Trustees mentioned in the first clause of my will, by death, resignation, or removal from the city, or separation from the aforesaid religious society, that the vacancy … , in which election each of the trustees of the said religious society, and each of the trustees of this fund shall be entitled to one vote; but no person shall east more than one vote by reason of being a member of the Board

Subsequent Injuries Fund v. Industrial Accident Commission

44 Cal. 2d 604 · California Supreme Court · May 27, 1955

Brown, Attorney General, Donald D. Stoker and W. B. Thayer, Deputy Attorneys General, for Petitioner. Everett A. Corten, Benjamin L. Wolfe and T. Groezinger for Respondents. SCHAUER, J. … Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com., 29 Cal.2d 79 [ 172 P.2d 884 ].)

Walker v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority

35 Cal. 4th 15 · California Supreme Court · Feb 3, 2005

Hollister Convalescent Hosp., Inc. v. … J., Kennard, J., Werdegar, L, Chin, J., Brown, J., and Moreno, J., concurred.

Heard v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n

25 Cal. 2d 322 · California Supreme Court · Dec 1, 1944

Code, §§ 100, 101, 103,105; Estate of Puett, 1 Cal.2d 131, 133 [ 33 P.2d 825 ] ; see Eaton v. … Brown, 193 U.S. 411, 413 [ 24 S.Ct. 487 , 48 L.Ed. 730 ] ; Rest.: Property: Future Interests, parts 3 and 4, § 241, comment (a) and comments on subsee. (2), § 242, comments (a), (b) and (c); Wigmore, Evidence (2d ed.) §§

Long Beach City School District v. Dodge

135 Cal. 401 · California Supreme Court · Jan 24, 1902

In Patent Brick Co. v. … That the demurrer was properly overruled, see Wise v. Hogan, 77 Cal. 184 ; Pleasant v. Samuels, 114 Cal. 34 ; McFarland v.

Title G. Etc. Co. v. Railroad Commission

168 Cal. 295 · California Supreme Court · Aug 3, 1914

(See Hatch v. Consumers’ Co., 17 Idaho, 204 , [40 L. R. A. (N. S.) 263, 104 Pac. 670 ] ; Consumers’ Co. v. Hatch, 224 U. S. 148 , [ 56 L. Ed. 703 , 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 465]; Pocatello W. Co. v. … Standley, 7 Idaho, 518 , [ 61 Pac. 518 ] ; Bothwell v. Consumers’ Co., 13 Idaho, 568 , [24 L. R. A. (N. S.) 485, 92 Pac. 533 ] ; Montgomery v. McDade (Ala.), 60 South. 797 ; Pine Bluff v. Toney, 96 Ark. 345 , [Ann.

In Re Harris

69 Cal. 2d 486 · California Supreme Court · Oct 30, 1968

Proc., § 503), and the right to appear by counsel (Cooke v. United States (1925) 267 U.S. 517, 537 [ 69 L.Ed. 767, 774 , 45 S.Ct. 390 ]; Steen v. … Board of Civil Service Comrs. (1945) 26 Cal.2d 716, 727 [ 160 P.2d 816 ]) and to seek appointment of counsel if he is indigent. 1 Petitioner contends that this statutory procedure does not meet the standards of due process

Guillory v. Superior Court

1 Cal. Rptr. 3d 879 · California Supreme Court · Jul 17, 2003

*172 Opinion BROWN, J. … (See People v.

Los Angeles County Pioneer Society v. Historical Society

40 Cal. 2d 852 · California Supreme Court · May 5, 1953

Code, § 9801; see Brown v. La Societe Francaise DeB. Mutuelle, 138 Cal. 475, 477 [ 71 P. 516 ]; Abalian v. Townsend Social Center, Inc., 112 Cal. … Code, § 9801; Brown v. La Societe Francaise Etc. Mutuelle, 138 Cal. 475, 477 [ 71 P. 516 ]; Abalian v. Townsend Social Center, Inc., 112 Cal. App.2d 441, 449 [ 246 P.2d 965 ]; 168 A.L.R. 956 ).