Case law

Pacific Merchant Shipping Assn. v. Board of Pilot Com.

California Court of Appeal · Dec 3, 2015

A CPRA plaintiff does not qualify as a prevailing party merely because the defendant disclosed records sometime after the CPRA action was filed. In Rogers v. … The petition clearly encompassed PMSA’s broad requests for the Port Agent’s public records.

P. ex rel. Bonta v. City of Huntington Beach

California Court of Appeal · Nov 3, 2025

Thus, amici for the City contend, the City has authority to determine that only voters who can present identification are qualified to vote. … Thus, while amici for the City contend the purpose of the word “plenary” was to immunize charter cities and counties from state law even on questions of statewide importance, the history of its addition to the Constitution

Jaynes v. Stockton

193 Cal. App. 2d 47 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 12, 1961

The board is not the final arbiter of its authority to act; this is a judicial function involving the application of law to facts; the court determines the facts in accord with established rules; and its determination in … The courts will not presume “that the legislature in the enactment of statutes intends to overthrow long-established principles of law unless such intention is made clearly to appear either by express declaration or by necessary

Alana M. v. .State of California CA1/3

245 Cal. App. 4th 1482 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 29, 2016

We begin with a brief discussion of the purpose of the natural condition immunity and cases applying the immunity before addressing Alana’s specific argument that the tree that injured her qualifies as “improved” public property … For his position that it was the location of the injury that determined whether the immunity applied, the plaintiff in Meddock relied on Eben’s statement that, “ ‘to qualify public property as improved so as to take it outside

People v. Raffington

98 Cal. App. 2d 455 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 14, 1950

. * Defendant contends that his constitutional rights have been infringed, asserting he was denied due process of law and his privileges and immunities were abridged in that: (1) he was charged by an information filed by … "Whenever the design of a person to commit a crime is clearly shown, slight acts done in furtherance of the design will constitute an attempt. (People v. Lanzit, 70 Cal.App. 498, 505 [ 233 P. 816 ]; People v.

Winikow v. Superior Court

82 Cal. App. 4th 719 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 27, 2000

“In [sic] is inappropriate to award costs against the trial judge or the Superior Court, as to do so would chill the judicial process which judicial immunity was established to protect. … We need not decide whether or not an act in excess of jurisdiction would avoid immunity for an award of costs against respondent.

First National Bank v. Lynch

19 Cal. App. 2d 291 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 18, 1937

Appellant is the duly appointed, qualified and acting trustee in bankruptcy of the estate of Preston Duncan, bankrupt. … It seems to be the established rule in this state that where a latent ambiguity exists in a will such evidence is admissible.

Cordiner v. Los Angeles Traction Co.

5 Cal. App. 400 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 16, 1907

Hence, of necessity, in determining the question courts and juries must rely upon the testimony of properly qualified physicians for such testimony as will in the minds of the jury establish the fact in issue to a reasonable … Such evidence must be clearly distinguished from conjecture, or that which merely establishes a possibility of future trouble.

Jazayeri v. Mao

174 Cal. App. 4th 301 · California Court of Appeal · May 27, 2009

Nor need the individual with personal knowledge testify; the rule permits any “ ‘qualified witness’ ” to establish to the conditions of admissibility. (1 Witkin, Cal. … The witness need not have been present at every transaction to establish the business records exception; he or she need only be familiar with the procedures followed, which Jazayeri clearly was.

People v. Smith

62 Cal. App. 4th 1233 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 6, 1998

First, subdivision 1 includes fear arising from a threat of injury to property, which clearly does not involve a high probability of death. … However, because we conclude that extortion does not provide a legal basis for felony murder, Smith clearly cannot be retried on that theory.

Guillory v. Hill

California Court of Appeal · Jun 26, 2019

At the phase one bench trial, the court rejected Hill’s affirmative defense of qualified immunity. … More importantly, if the law on postsearch detention had been murky at the time of the underlying incident, Hill’s qualified immunity defense would have defeated all plaintiffs’ claims against her (Saucier v.

City of Scotts Valley v. County of Santa Cruz

201 Cal. App. 4th 1 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 26, 2011

While the Legislature clearly intended that ERAF I apply to TEA cities, the statutory language did not accomplish that result. … Bill 8 as establishing an “allocation” system].)

Smith v. County of Santa Barbara

203 Cal. App. 3d 1415 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 27, 1988

There is no evidentiary basis for a finding of immunity with regard to the Forest Service. … render services to the federal government are not entitled to share in the immunity.

Oddo v. Hedde

101 Cal. App. 2d 375 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 22, 1950

If he was “qualified to engage in the whole,” said the attorney general, “he is necessarily qualified to engage in any part thereof.” If other evidence were required to establish Mr. … Clearly, the position of appellants is a thunderous appeal to equity.

Vinci v. Edmonds

185 Cal. App. 3d 1251 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 29, 1986

As such, it has been held that relief will be granted under section 10471 unless to do so is clearly forbidden by statute. {Ibid.) … Commissioner has failed to establish any abuse of discretion in that ruling. (See Booth v.

Department of Social Services v. Gregory P.

196 Cal. App. 3d 325 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 19, 1987

The presumption is rebutted by a court decree establishing paternity of the child by another man.” … Such being the case, subdivision (b) of that statute was clearly controlling: “The presumption [that a man is the natural father of a child] is rebutted by a court decree establishing paternity of the child by another man

Villanueva v. Fidelity Nat. Title Co.

California Court of Appeal · Sep 7, 2018

third parties in connection with defendants’ performance of escrow and title services, such as overnight mail, courier, and notary services, unless (1) such practice is permitted by state and federal law and (2) defendants clearly … Thus, the question presented is whether section 12414.27 is a prohibitory statute that carves out an exception to the section 12414.26 immunity or an implementing statue that establishes an operative date for the rate filing

Castro v. Fireman's Fund American Life Insurance

206 Cal. App. 3d 1114 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 22, 1988

It is also well established, however, that this rule of construction is applicable only when the policy language is found to be unclear. (Gray, supra, at p. 271 ; Wolf Machinery Co. v. … Any limitation on coverage or any exclusion in the policy must be clearly stated in order to apprise the insured of such limitations. (State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v.

People v. Fulk

39 Cal. App. 3d 851 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 17, 1974

Although the possibility of the existence of an additional charge is not mentioned in the diversion statute, the scheme established by the Legislature therein is readily applicable in cases in which there is such a charge … The enactment of sections 1000 through 1000.4 of the Penal Code clearly qualifies as remedial legislation.

Prager University v. Google LLC

California Court of Appeal · Dec 5, 2022

“[T]he provision establishes a subjective standard whereby internet users and software providers decide what online material is objectionable.” (Enigma Software Group USA, LLC v. … of CDA immunity as to its other claims.