Case law

In Re Marriage of Padgett

172 Cal. App. 4th 830 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 25, 2009

Tise established that a state court domestic relations order may be qualified even after a participant's death, `[b]ecause a QDRO only renders enforceable an already-existing interest.' [ Tise, supra, ] 234 F.3d at 421. … Hamilton framed the "pivotal question" as "whether the dissolution order `clearly contains the information specified in the statute that a plan administrator would need to make an informed decision.'

Shively v. Dye Creek Cattle Co.

29 Cal. App. 4th 1620 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 9, 1994

Finding that Dye Creek owed no duty to plaintiffs because plaintiffs had not set forth any basis to establish that duty, the trial court granted Dye Creek a summary judgment. We reverse. … Larson (1985) 163 Cal.App.3d 407 [ 209 Cal.Rptr. 445 ], Civil Code section 1714 applies “ ‘unless public policy clearly requires that an exception be made.’ ” ( 163 Cal.App.3d at p. 410 , quoting Lipson v.

Mercurio v. Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control

144 Cal. App. 2d 626 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 25, 1956

to the licensing authority for their conduct in the exercise of his license, else we would have the absurd result that liquor could be sold by employees at forbidden hours in licensed premises and the licensees would be immune … However, a reading of the findings clearly shows that such finding dealt only with the charge of operating a stud poker game. 6 All legitimate and reasonable inferences must be indulged in - support of the board’s findings

Ferguson v. Ferguson

58 Cal. App. 2d 811 · California Court of Appeal · May 26, 1943

It is clear that if respondents were purchasers for value and without notice, taking their title through the decree of distribution which constitutes a muniment of title immune to collateral attack, they cannot be charged … The distinction, with cases in support thereof, is clearly stated in Pellerito v.

People v. Dubon

108 Cal. Rptr. 2d 914 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 19, 2001

Section 1016.5 clearly states that its purpose is to promote fairness by requiring appropriate warnings to defendants. … The People, on the other hand, urge that the minute order qualifies as a record for purposes of section 1016.5.

Stop the Casino 101 Coalition v. Brown

230 Cal. App. 4th 280 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 3, 2014

Clearly neither of the first two methods apply and, the coalition argues, neither does the third. … Moreover, his determination clearly is correct.

Kleinclaus v. Marin Realty Co.

94 Cal. App. 2d 733 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 22, 1949

Since respondents in their petition for rehearing did not question the accuracy of the recital of the basic facts in our opinion previously filed nor our conclusion that their negligence was clearly established we copy that … Or confining the question to railroads, what limits shall be put upon their immunity from the result of their wrongful operation?

Keulen v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.

66 Cal. App. 4th 1089 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 23, 1998

“Unless the treating physician’s opinion clearly is no longer valid, it should be not considered of lesser relevance than that of the qualified medical evaluator.” (Minniear v. Mt. … The new evidence established that *1098 Keulen’s condition was neither permanent nor stationary.

Levine v. Weis

108 Cal. Rptr. 2d 562 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 25, 2001

There the court determined that governmental immunity did not apply to state employees who were sued under the False Claims Act. … The exercise of the trial court’s discretion in awarding fees will not be disturbed unless it is clearly wrong. (Ibid.)

People v. Bradford

95 Cal. App. 2d 372 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 28, 1949

constitutionality of the quoted section is grounded first, on the claim that it is violative of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States which prohibits the abridgment by any state of the privileges or immunities … Proc., §§ 1958, 1960) that such paraphernalia was being used for bookmaking purposes, thus establishing the corpus delicti.

Estate of Pryor

51 Cal. App. 2d 735 · California Court of Appeal · May 5, 1942

After a hearing, the will was admitted to probate and Ann Stevenson was appointed executrix and qualified as such. … Pryor, was clearly and substantially placed in a worse position by the upholding of the will.

People v. The North River Insurance Co.

California Court of Appeal · Oct 28, 2019

A defendant who is ill or insane qualifies as “disabled” because of circumstances beyond the defendant’s agency. … Implicit in these rulings is a finding that potential extradition, in and of itself, does not qualify as a “temporary disability.”

People v. Johnson

39 Cal. App. 3d 749 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 11, 1974

The record establishes that Sullivan was not a settled man but was moving around with unnamed persons. … At that point, the trial judge excused the jury and in camera granted the witness immunity from prosecution. When the witness still refused to testify he was held in contempt (p. 804).

People v. Petsas

214 Cal. App. 3d 70 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 20, 1989

At the preliminary hearing, Forward testified, under transactional grant of immunity, that the preparation of the reports in this manner was “probably an error on [her] part.” … Here the evidence is sufficient to establish the inference drawn by the magistrate of an intent to defraud.

Patterson v. Sacramento City Unified School District

66 Cal. Rptr. 3d 337 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 25, 2007

Public school districts enjoy certain immunities from actions for negligence. … provisions in section 87706, the immunity statute applicable to community college districts. 3 Together, and with specific exceptions, sections 44808 and 87706 immunize school districts and community college districts from

American Home Assurance Co. v. Essy

179 Cal. App. 2d 19 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 18, 1960

at page 990 : *23 declaratory actions rests, in the vast majority of cases, on the moving party, ’ Professor Borchard proceeds to point out that in cases such as the one we have here, ‘ Inasmuch as the company’s claim of immunity … Clearly, the time factor influenced the reviewing court’s conclusion that the evidence was insufficient to prove that the defendant had set the fire.

Gilbaugh v. Bautzer

3 Cal. App. 3d 793 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 22, 1970

Sess., ch. 49) established the Trustees of the California State Colleges and provided for transfer of the state colleges to that board from the State Board of Education on and after July 1, 1961. … On the contrary, the provisions for composition of the board (§ 22601.5), terms of trustees- (§ 22604), independence from political and sectarian influence (§ 22605), among others, clearly are designed to operate permanently

Knowlton v. Hezmalhalch

32 Cal. App. 2d 419 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 26, 1939

They need not be separately considered. . . . 11 The resolutions of the Richmond city council come within the principles established by these authorities. … The council could consider the questions of public good, public interests, and public policy involved solely by virtue of and in the exercise of its legislative powers, and its action thereon was clearly an act in the exercise

Colt v. Freedom Communications, Inc.

1 Cal. Rptr. 3d 245 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 27, 2003

But the anti-SLAPP statute does not provide immunity. Instead, it places the burden on a plaintiff to establish “that there is a probability that the plaintiff will prevail on the claim.” (§ 425.16, subd. (b)(1).) … This may qualify as negligence, but it is hardly clear and convincing evidence of malice.

Grier v. Ferrant

62 Cal. App. 2d 306 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 13, 1944

immune from a general demurrer. … Clearly the insurance company did not participate in the actual operation of the taxicab business and such participation therein is not alleged in the amended complaint.