Case law

Cadierque v. Duran

49 Cal. 356 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1874

The plaintiff in 1871 filed a protest against the approval of the location made by Duran; and on the 8th of January, 1872, defendant Brown also filed a like protest; and on the 12th of January, 1872, the plaintiff applied … to a transfer to Brown of Duran’s right to purchase the lands from the State.

Keena v. Board of Supervisors of Placer County

89 Cal. 11 · California Supreme Court · May 4, 1891

of supervisors, asking that the road be abandoned, and thereupon the board made and entered its order declaring that the road be discontinued and abandoned; that on the 11th of January, 1890, the board made and entered an … It follows that the proceedings of the board in this regard were authorized and sufficient.

Christie v. Board of Supervisors of Sonoma County

60 Cal. 164 · California Supreme Court · Mar 10, 1882

Upon the presentation of an account, properly made out and verified, and that certificate to the Board of Supervisors, it was the duty of that Board to allow a reasonable compensation for such services. … the items” is presented to the Board, was to have the Board furnished with sufficient data for intelligently determining the amount due to a claimant before even considering his claim.

Department of Veterans Affairs v. Board of Supervisors

31 Cal. 2d 657 · California Supreme Court · Apr 3, 1948

(People v. Board of Supervisors of Calaveras County, 126 Cal.App. 670 [ 15 P.2d 209 ].) … (People v. Board of Supervisors of Calaveras County, supra.) But a state agency is not required to apply for the cancellation of an assessment (City of Pasadena v.

Yamaha Corp. of America v. State Board of Equalization

78 Cal. Rptr. 2d 1 · California Supreme Court · Aug 27, 1998

Opinion BROWN, J. … (See Rizzo v. Board of Trustees (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 853, 861 [ 32 Cal.Rptr.2d 892 ]; DeYoung v. City of San Diego (1983) 147 Cal.App.3d 11, 18 [ 194 Cal.Rptr. 722 ]; Rivera v.

Runyon v. Board of Trustees of California State University

48 Cal. 4th 760 · California Supreme Court · May 3, 2010

We hold CSU employees, like employees of state boards and agencies (see State Bd. of Chiropractic Examiners v. … In Miklosy v.

Brougher v. Board of Public Works of San Francisco

205 Cal. 426 · California Supreme Court · Oct 31, 1928

A similar situation was shown in Miller v. Board of Public Works of the City of Los Angeles, 195 Cal. 477 [38 A. L. … Board of Public Works of the City of Los Angeles, 195 Cal. 477 [38 A. L. R. 1479, 234 Pac. 381 ]; Zahn v. Board of Public Works of the City of Los Angeles, 195 Cal. 497 [ 234 Pac. 388 ]; Fourcade v.

Crall v. Board of Directors of Poso Irrigation District

87 Cal. 140 · California Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1890

Dec. 49 ; Rogers v. King, 22 Cal. 72 ; Halleck v. Moss, 22 Cal. 266 ; Irwin v. Scriber, 18 Cal. 500 .) … (Mayo v. Ah Loy, 32 Cal. 477 ; 91 Am. Dec. 595 ; People v. Doe, 36 Cal. 220 ; Eitel v. Foote, 39 Cal. 439 .)

Miller v. Board of Public Works of Los Angeles

195 Cal. 477 · California Supreme Court · Feb 27, 1925

A. 1916B, 1248, 132 Pac. 584 ] (affirmed in Hadacheck v. Sebastian, supra); Sam Kee v. Wilde, 41 Cal. App. 528 [ 183 Pac. 164 ]; Boyd v. City of Sierra Madre, 41 Cal. App. 520 [ 183 Pac. 230 ]; Brown v. … (Brown v. City of Los Angeles, supra.)

Zahn v. Board of Public Works of Los Angeles

195 Cal. 497 · California Supreme Court · Feb 27, 1925

Carter v. Harper, 182 Wis. 148 [33 A. L. R. 269, 196 N. W. 451 ]; State ex rel. Civello v. New Orleans, 154 La. 271 [33 A. L. R. 260, 97 South. 440 ]; Ware v. … As was said in Brown v.

Governing Board of Rialto Unified School District v. Mann

18 Cal. 3d 819 · California Supreme Court · Jan 6, 1977

(See id.; Board of Education v. Swan (1953) 41 Cal.2d 546, 557 [ 261 P.2d 261 ].) … Code, § 13436, see Board of Education v. Swan, supra, 41 Cal.2d 546, 557 ; Board of Education v.

Phillipson v. Board of Administration, Public Employees' Retirement System

3 Cal. 3d 32 · California Supreme Court · Aug 26, 1970

Crossan, supra, 35 Cal.App.2d 39, 40 ); it cannot render any award, however, which compels the board to pay over such contributions prior to the employee’s termination of service with the state. See Brown v. … Brown (1915) 170 Cal. 1, 3 [ 147 P. 1168 ]; Buller v. Buller (1944) 62 Cal.App.2d 687, 692 [ 145 P.2d 649 ], in Wissner v.

Fashion Valley Mall, LLC v. National Labor Relations Board

69 Cal. Rptr. 3d 288 · California Supreme Court · Dec 24, 2007

In Marsh v. … (Id. at p. 1032 (plur. opn. of Brown, J.), fn. omitted.)

Board of Directors of Modesto Irrigation District v. Tregea

88 Cal. 334 · California Supreme Court · Mar 19, 1891

Without referring to many earlier and later decisions bearing more or less directly upon the point, it is sufficient to say that the statute and proceedings under review in Lent v. … A knowledge of the law is, however, imputed to every one interested in the proceeding, and it is decided in Lent v.

People ex rel. Dorsey v. Smyth

28 Cal. 21 · California Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1865

This question is wholly unaffected by the mandamus against the Board of Supervisors. The relator was not a party to that proceeding, nor had the Board any power over or duty to perform touching the salary of his office. … Morton v. Tieman, 8 Abbott’s Practice Reports, 359.) In the case cited the Court said : “ The salary and fees are incident to the title, and not to the usurpation and colorable possession of an office.

Board of Social Welfare v. County of Los Angeles

27 Cal. 2d 90 · California Supreme Court · Oct 16, 1945

Justice Carter, in Stockton Sav. & Loan Bank v. … A similar contention was advanced, but rejected by this court, in County of Alameda v. Janssen (1940), 16 Cal.2d 276 [ 106 P.2d 11 , 130 A.L.R. 1141 ].

Lavin v. State Bar

14 Cal. 3d 581 · California Supreme Court · Jun 10, 1975

Our review of the record reveals substantial evidence in support of the board’s correct and adequate findings. The Brown Matter In April 1971 Mrs. … (Yokozeki v. State Bar, supra, 11 Cal.3d 436, 450 .) *586 Accepting the recommendation of the board (Schullman v.

California Correctional Peace Officers Ass'n. v. State Personnel Board

10 Cal. 4th 1133 · California Supreme Court · Aug 17, 1995

(Common Cause v. Board of Supervisors (1989) 49 Cal.3d 432, 443 [ 261 Cal.Rptr. 574 , 111 P.2d 610 ].) … Code, § 500; Arwine v. Board of Med. Examiners (1907) 151 Cal. 499, 503 [ 91 P. 319 ]; Campbell v. Board of Dental Examiners (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 872, 876 [ 95 Cal.Rptr. 351 ]; Nilsson v.

Simmons v. State Bar

65 Cal. 2d 281 · California Supreme Court · Oct 25, 1966

The burden is upon one seeking a review of a recommendation of a disciplinary board to show that its findings are not supported by the evidence or that its recommendation is erroneous or unlawful. (Marlowe v. … The check was deposited in the account, and then I paid things for Laura Brown out of that. ’ ’ In response to questions from a member of the disciplinary board concerning Laura Brown, petitioner testified, as follows: “Mb

Board of Railroad Commissioners v. Market Street Railway Co.

132 Cal. 677 · California Supreme Court · May 15, 1901

Co. v. Ferguson, 113 U. … Co. v.