Case law

People v. Stone

199 Cal. 610 · California Supreme Court · Nov 9, 1926

(People v. Tom Woo, 181 Cal. 315 [ 184 Pac. 389 ] ; People v. Willard, 150 Cal. 543 [ 89 Pac. 124 ].) … Code, sec. 1012; People v. Byron, 103 Cal. 675 [ 37 Pac. 754 ] ; People v. Ellenwood, 119 Cal. 166 [ 51 Pac. 553 ] ; People v. Dean, 66 Cal. App. 602 [ 226 Pac. 943 ].)

Williams v. Mountaineer Gold Mining Co.

102 Cal. 134 · California Supreme Court · Mar 29, 1894

It was so held in Cox v. Western Pacific R. R., 44 Cal. 28 . See, also, Farmers’ Loan and Trust Co. v. … In Silvester v. Coe Min.

Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training v. Superior Court

64 Cal. Rptr. 3d 661 · California Supreme Court · Aug 27, 2007

(Kibler v. … (Bonnell v. Medical Board (2003) 31 Cal.4th 1255, 1263 [ 8 Cal.Rptr.3d 532 , 82 P.3d 740 ].)

People v. Victor

62 Cal. 2d 280 · California Supreme Court · Jan 27, 1965

(American Civil Liberties Union v. Board of Education (1963) 59 Cal.2d 203, 218 [9] [ 28 Cal.Rptr. 700 , 379 P.2d 4 ].) A primary source of definition is the context of the questioned language (Civ. … (Select Base Materials, Inc. v. Board of Equalization (1959) 51 Cal.2d 640, 645 [2-3] [ 335 P.2d 672 ].)

Dabney v. Philleo

37 Cal. 2d 672 · California Supreme Court · Aug 22, 1951

(Guardianship of Vucinich (1935), 3 Cal.2d 235, 243 [ 44 P.2d 567 ]; see also Wilkerson v. Seib (1942), 20 Cal.2d 556, 562 [ 127 P.2d 904 ]; Stratton v. … (Estate of Rolls.(1924), 193 Cal. 594, 599 [ 226 P. 608 ]; see, also, Brown v.

People v. Gonzalez

43 Cal. 4th 1118 · California Supreme Court · Jun 2, 2008

For example, in People v. … (See People v. Brown (2003) 31 Cal.4th 518, 534 [ 3 Cal.Rptr.3d 145 , 73 P.3d 1137 ] [court should not entertain constitutional claims unless necessary to resolve a case].) III.

Sun'n Sand, Inc. v. United California Bank

21 Cal. 3d 671 · California Supreme Court · Jul 20, 1978

(Pacific Finance Corp. v. Bank of Yolo (1932) 215 Cal. 357 [ 10 P.2d 68 ] and Pacific Indemnity Co. v. Security First Nat. Bank (1967) 248 Cal.App.2d 75 [ 56 Cal.Rptr. 142 ].) … This conclusion relying upon the form of the action seems contrary to Daly v.

Draper v. Aceto

113 Cal. Rptr. 2d 61 · California Supreme Court · Nov 1, 2001

In Summers v. … Baxter, J., Chin, J., Brown, J., and Marchiano, J., * concurred. All further undesignated statutory references are to the Labor Code.

Garcia v. Industrial Accident Commission

41 Cal. 2d 689 · California Supreme Court · Nov 13, 1953

Brown, Attorney General, Irving H. Perluss, Assistant Attorney General, William L. Shaw and Vincent P. Lafferty, Deputy Attorneys General, for Respondents. *691 SCHAUER, J. … Co. v. Industrial Acc.

In re Estate of McDevitt

95 Cal. 17 · California Supreme Court · Jun 16, 1892

(Waterman v. Whitney, 11 N. Y. 157 ; 62 Am. Dec. 71 .) … For his board at the house of Andrew he never paid or offered to pay one cent. He required more money than he was getting for rents, to improve his property.

Vanderslice v. Hanks

3 Cal. 27 · California Supreme Court · Oct 15, 1852

In some of them, also, as in Lebois v. Brommell, 4 How.; Blanc v. Lafayette, 11 How.; Lecompte v. United States, 11 How.; and Menard’s Heirs v. … The same question arose in the case of Taylor & Quarle v. *43 Brown, 5 Graneh.

Parker v. Otis

130 Cal. 322 · California Supreme Court · Oct 27, 1900

(Kullman v. Simmens, 104 Cal. 595 ; Sheehy v. Shinn, supra). The court will always see that legitimate business transactions are not brought under the ban. *Page 330 5. … (See Sheehy v. Shinn, supra, and cases there referred to; Kullman v. Simmens, supra.) 6.

People v. King

115 Cal. Rptr. 2d 214 · California Supreme Court · Jan 10, 2002

Both People v. … WE CONCUR: GEORGE, C.J., KENNARD, WERDEGAR, CHIN, BROWN, and MORENO, JJ.

Bibend v. Liverpool & London Fire & Life Insurance

30 Cal. 78 · California Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1866

According to Lord Chancellor King, in Lynch v. Dalzell, 4 Brown, 431, and Lord Chancellor Hardwick, in Sadlers’ Co. v. … (Mitchell v. Winslow, 2 Story, 639 ; Wright v. Wright, 1 Ves. 409, 411.)

Pacific Factor Co. v. Adler

90 Cal. 110 · California Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1891

(Craft v. McConoughy, 79 Ill. 346 ; 12 Am. Rep. 171 ; Arnott v. Pittston and Elmira Coal Co., 68 N. Y. 558 ; 23 Am. Rep. 190 .) It is difficult to distinguish upon principle the case of Santa Clara V. M. & L. Co. v. … (Patent Brick Co. v. Moore, 75 Cal. 205 ; Eva v. McMahon, 77. Cal. 472.)

McKee v. Cal. Annual Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church

166 Cal. 409 · California Supreme Court · Nov 26, 1913

(Kenaday v. Sinnott, 179 U. S. 618 , [ 45 L. Ed. 339 , 21 Sup. Ct. Rep. 233].) In Tifft v. Porter, 8 N. … In Gelbach v.

People v. Box

99 Cal. Rptr. 2d 69 · California Supreme Court · Aug 17, 2000

*1171 Opinion BROWN,J. A jury found defendant Christopher Clark Box and Manuel Flores, Jr., guilty of the first degree murders of April Gilhousen, her three-year-old son Bryan, and a houseguest, Kevin Chandler (Pen. … Moreover, Zigelbaum was not board-certified in either psychiatry or forensic psychiatry.

Gutierrez v. Tostado

California Supreme Court · Jul 31, 2025

This statute establishes the default rule that each person has a duty ‘to exercise, in his or her activities, reasonable care for the safety of others.’ ” (Brown v. … Brown proclaimed that the “cost of medical malpractice insurance has risen to levels which many physicians find intolerable.” (Governor’s Proclamation to Leg. (May 16, 1975) Stats. 1975, 2d Ex.

Banning Ranch Conservancy v. City of Newport Beach

216 Cal. Rptr. 3d 306 · California Supreme Court · Mar 30, 2017

Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 564), we accord greater deference to the agency‟s substantive factual conclusions. … (Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors, supra, 52 Cal.3d at p. 564 (Goleta Valley).)

Grunwald v. Freese

4 Cal. Unrep. 182 · California Supreme Court · Aug 31, 1893

(free on board), San Francisco, ninety days’ sight draft, etc. … Clemens, 58 Pa. 24 ; Cash v. Kennion, 11 Ves. 315.