Case law

Hope v. Contractors' State License Board

228 Cal. App. 2d 414 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 10, 1964

(Moran v. Board of Medical Examiners, 32 Cal.2d 301 [ 196 P.2d 20 ]; Backman v. State of California, 167 Cal.App.2d 82 [ 333 P.2d 830 ]; Tabory v. … State Personnel Board, 208 Cal.App.2d 543 [ 25 Cal.Rptr. 333 ]; Hutchinson v. Contractors’ State etc. Board, 143 Cal.App.2d 628 [ 300 P.2d 216 ].)

Johnstone v. State Board of Equalization

95 Cal. App. 2d 527 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 11, 1950

board, unless the board shall determine that the issuance of such licenses for other premises is warranted because of the public convenience and necessity.” … Paragraph four then confers the rule-making power on the board, and requires the board to restrict seasonal licenses in each county as the board “shall determine shall be in the interest of public welfare and morals, convenience

Burnsed v. State Board of Control

189 Cal. App. 3d 213 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 15, 1987

Bureau v. Warwick (1976) 17 Cal.3d 190, 195 [ 130 Cal.Rptr. 520 , 550 P.2d 1056 ].) In Davidson v. … (Bryant v. Industrial Acc.

O'HAGEN v. Board of Zoning Adjustment

19 Cal. App. 3d 151 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 9, 1971

(Tustin Heights Assn. v. Board of Supervisors, 170 Cal.App.2d 619, 626 [ 339 P.2d 914 ]; Wheeler v. Gregg, 90 Cal.App.2d 348, 360 [ 203 P.2d 37 ].) … (See Savelli v. Board of Medical Examiners, 229 Cal.App.2d 124, 133 [ 40 Cal.Rptr. 171 ]; Le Strange v.

Rivard v. Board of Pension Commissioners

164 Cal. App. 3d 405 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 4, 1985

(Traub v. Board of Retirement (1983) 34 Cal.3d 793, 797 [ 195 Cal.Rptr. 681 , 670 P.2d 335 ]; Strumsky v. … (Yakov v. Board of Medical Examiners (1968) 68 Cal.2d 67, 74, fn. 7 [ 64 Cal.Rptr. 785 , 435 P.2d 553 ].)

Slattery v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board

60 Cal. App. 3d 245 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 19, 1976

of the parties.” (§ 1952; see also, Gibson v. … In Gibson v. Unemployment Ins.

Rinaldo v. Board of Medical Examiners

135 Cal. App. 613 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 7, 1933

adversely to appellant’s contention in the case of Dyment v. … (Rinaldo v. Board of Medical Examiners, 123 Cal. App. 712, 717 [ 12 Pac. (2d) 32 ].)

Bstandig v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

68 Cal. App. 3d 988 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 8, 1977

The board mentions Hart v. Industrial Acc. Com., 119 Cal.App. 200 [ 6 P.2d 348 ], and Industrial Indem. Exch. v. Ind. Acc. Com. (Riccardi) 90 Cal.App.2d 99 [ 202 P.2d 850 ]. … As explained in Brown v. Workmen’s Comp.

Azzaro v. Board of Supervisors

273 Cal. App. 2d 16 · California Court of Appeal · May 15, 1969

The Board of Supervisors of the County of Fresno initiated proceedings to form an improvement district under the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 (Sts. & Hy. … After a protest hearing, as provided by section 10311, the board of supervisors ruled that all of the area between Winery and Clovis, including the Peach-Helm segment, was properly included within the boundaries of the proposed

Rutherford v. State Personnel Board

101 Cal. App. 3d 1 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 14, 1980

(Payne v. Superior Court (1976) 17 Cal. 3d 908, 925 [ 132 Cal.Rptr. 405 , 553 P.2d 565 ].) Rutherford contends he has a right to be offered any vacant administrative position for which he is qualified. We agree. … (Parsons v. Bristol Development Co. (1965) 62 Cal.2d 861 [ 44 Cal.Rptr. 767 , 402 P.2d 839 ].)

Schneider v. State Board of Equalization

62 Cal. App. 2d 463 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 25, 1944

The respondent board has now moved to dismiss this appeal. The trial court, while sitting as a probate court, has only the jurisdiction conferred upon it by statute. (Texas Co. v. Bank of America N. T. & S. … (O’Donnell v. Board of Medical Examiners, 22 Cal.App.2d 80 [ 70 P.2d 246 ]; MacCracken v. Board of Medical Examiners, 24 Cal.App.2d 58 [ 74 P.2d 289 ].)

Mills v. Board of Trustees

35 Cal. App. 424 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 27, 1917

of trustees the said petition and his said certificate on October 9, 1917, at a regular meeting of the board.” … We must, therefore, find that the members of the board had no actual knowledge on the subject.

Moore v. Board of Education

96 Cal. App. 2d 28 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 9, 1950

The contract is alleged to be evidenced by a letter which contains the following provision: ‘' The entire amount of the bid $9,300 to be raised by private means, without cost or obligation on part of the Board of Education

Axelrod v. Board of Education

37 Cal. App. 2d 367 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 19, 1940

There is no allegation as to “ . . . the rules and regulations established by the governing board of the district”, regarding deductions from the salary of a teacher during her absence. … Nor is there any allegation as to whether the defendants made the deduction in question according “ ... to the rules and regulations established by the governing board of the district”.

Conrad v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board

47 Cal. App. 3d 237 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 16, 1975

Citing Smith v. District Unemployment Compensation Board (D.C. Cir. 1970) 435 F.2d 433 , appellant argues that the Appeals Board should have reviewed the initial SSA finding. … (Thomas v. California Emp. Stab. Com. (1952) 39 Cal.2d 501, 504 [ 247 P.2d 561 ]; Cal. Portland Cement Co. v. Cal. Unemp. Ins. Appeals Board (1960) 178 Cal.App.2d 263, 269 [ 3 Cal.Rptr. 37 ].)

Sheehan v. Board of Police Commissioners

47 Cal. App. 793 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 7, 1920

[1] The facts in this case are identical with those set forth in the case of Sheehan v. Board of Police Commissioners, ante, p. 29, [ 190 P. 51 ], and on the authority of that case the judgment is affirmed.

Cooperman v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board

49 Cal. App. 3d 1 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 10, 1975

Cooperman appealed to a referee of the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board (Board). … (Wenban Estate, Inc. v. Hewlett, supra; Minton v.

Bracken v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

214 Cal. App. 3d 246 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 25, 1989

We are not bound to accept the Board’s factual findings where they are illogical, unreasonable, or improbable (Insurance Co. of North America v. Workers’Comp. … We are not bound to accept the Board’s factual findings where, as here, they are unreasonable (Insurance Co. of North America v. Workers’ Comp.

Turner v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

258 Cal. App. 2d 442 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 31, 1968

Respondent Board contends that the Supreme Court has resolved this question in State Comp. Ins. Fund v. Industrial Acc. Com. … Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com.

Jensky v. State Board of Equalization

67 Cal. App. 2d 612 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 20, 1945

(Haddad v. McDowell, 213 Cal. 690, 691 [ 3 P.2d 550 ]; Stillwell Hotel Co. v. Anderson, 4 Cal.2d 463, 464 [ 50 P.2d 441 ]; Buttner v. American Bell Tel. … Cecil, 47 Cal.App.2d 758, 765 [118 P.2d.830]; People v. Weitzel, 201 Cal. 116, 118 [ 255 P. 792 ]; California Employment Commission v.