Case law

Basden v. Wagner

181 Cal. App. 4th 929 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 2, 2010

It agreed with plaintiff that the weight of the evidence established she required protective supervision. … Plaintiff had believed she could receive protective supervision services only under the residual program, to which section 12300(e) clearly applies.

People v. Miller

114 Cal. App. 293 · California Court of Appeal · May 23, 1931

On cross-examination, however, the witness somewhat qualified his testimony by stating that both men fell to the ground about the same time. Mrs. 0’Nall’s testimony was substantially the same. … Jur. 607); and the necessity of proving an intent to kill depends upon the kind of manslaughter sought to be established.

In Re Estate of Thompson

18 Cal. App. 2d 680 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 26, 1937

This secondary thought is clearly demonstrated by the clause of the will which provided that if upon the death of both sisters the entire residue of the estate amounted to no more than $1,000, it should all go to the Odd … But it is well established in this state by statute and judicial decision that the words of a will are to be taken in their ordinary and grammatical sense unless a clear intention to use them in another sense can be collected

Block v. Sacramento Clinical Labs, Inc.

131 Cal. App. 3d 386 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 30, 1982

Beam moved for summary judgment, asserting the privileges of Civil Code section 47, subdivisions 2 and 3. 3 The trial court held the communication subject to the qualified privilege of Civil Code section 47, subdivision 3 … Block were clearly foreseeable and in fact foreseen by Mr. Beam.” Plaintiff relies upon cases which place foreseeability as the “key component necessary to establish liability.” (Weirum v.

Gardiana v. Small Claims Court

59 Cal. App. 3d 412 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 23, 1976

“It is apparent that such a court was established in order to offer a means of obtaining speedy settlement of claims of small amounts. … The question is one for the judicial determination of the court, and its ruling will not be disturbed unless the record clearly discloses an abuse of discretion, . . .” (Hilbert v.

Division of Labor Law Enforcement Department of Industrial Relations v. Safeway Stores, Inc.

96 Cal. App. 2d 481 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 15, 1950

A weekly salary, as established by the Distribution Division Manager. “2. A quarterly bonus based on Meat Section sales, providing he qualified as hereinafter outlined. … In the period involved in *485 1947, the increase of $20 per week in the minimum wages, as established by the union contract, was treated as a payment in excess of the base pay established by defendant in its bulletin and

People v. Perez

243 Cal. App. 2d 528 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 19, 1966

The error, if any, was clearly nonprejudicial. … The introduction of the package itself was neither essential to establish defendant’s guilt nor necessary to assure a fair trial. (People v. Cisneras, 214 Cal.App.2d 62 [ 29 Cal.Rptr. 146 ]; People v.

Ehrenkranz v. S.F. Zen Center

California Court of Appeal · Mar 2, 2026

“This does not mean that religious institutions enjoy a general immunity from secular laws,” the court explained. (Id. at p. 746.) … Governing Board (1994) 8 Cal.4th 333, 340; see also In re D.B. (2014) 58 Cal.4th 941, 948 [“To justify departing from a literal reading of a clearly worded statute, the results produced must be so unreasonable the Legislature

In Re Jeanette H.

225 Cal. App. 3d 25 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 14, 1990

Furthermore, the order of the juvenile court clearly intends to establish a policy of requiring parties upon request to exchange witness lists in all appropriate cases. … First, the protection is qualified rather than absolute. ( City of Long Beach v. Superior Court, supra, 64 Cal. App.3d at p. 79 .)

People v. Superior Court (Ahn)

California Court of Appeal · Nov 28, 2018

First, as noted in the majority opinion, the trial court’s grant of judgment on the pleadings for the Ahn parties was clearly erroneous and must be set aside. … So, all nonparticipating physicians would have to do to establish standing is plead they operate businesses providing services to patients who may qualify as terminal under

Professional Career Colleges, Magna Institute, Inc. v. Superior Court

207 Cal. App. 3d 490 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 25, 1989

That is, where a party has clearly failed to meet the time limits, may he reset the clock through the stratagem of asking the same question again? … We begin by noting the well-established rule that, in construing a statute, the task of the court is to ascertain the legislative intent so as to effectuate the purposes of the law. (Walters v.

Bourgi v. West Covina Motors, Inc.

166 Cal. App. 4th 1649 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 24, 2008

A central purpose of the Vehicle Code damage disclosure law in section 9990 et seq. is to establish a clearly defined line between damage to a new vehicle that is so immaterial that it need not be disclosed when the vehicle … When the moving party is a defendant, we first identify the issues framed by the pleadings; next, we determine whether the defendant has shown the plaintiff has not established, and cannot reasonably expect to establish,

People v. Webster

13 Cal. App. 348 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 29, 1910

beyond a reasonable doubt was so often and clearly stated to the jury, that they must have understood his right in that behalf. … Morine, 61 Cal. 369 , where the same instruction was considered, to say that other instructions given qualify and explain the objectionable instruction, and that the charge read as a whole correctly presents the law on the

People v. Jackson

88 Cal. App. 2d 747 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 22, 1948

It is true that the flight of a person who is charged with a crime, standing alone, is insufficient to establish his guilt. … In the Hines case, supra, in which the judgment was reversed because it appeared that all Negroes had been arbitrary excluded from the jury, the Supreme Court said: ‘ ‘ ‘ Clearly the preceding mandates imply that one who

People v. Parker

33 Cal. App. 3d 842 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 6, 1973

At the hearing of the motion to dismiss respondent offered the oral testimony of some six qualified witnesses with respect to the subjects of human sexuality and behavior, marriage, family counseling and medicine and related … It was also established that films depicting acts of oral copulation are now being shown in numerous medical schools throughout the United States.

Alpha Therapeutic Corp. v. Home Ins. Co.

109 Cal. Rptr. 2d 698 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 13, 2002

The "assault on the immune system is immediate. The victim suffers from a sudden and serious decline in the number of white blood cells. There is no latency period.... … In the usual case, where injuries are clearly assignable to one policy or the other, the insured might fall below its aggregate cap in one policy but exceed it in the other.

Southern California Edison Co. v. State Water Resources Control Board

116 Cal. App. 3d 751 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 11, 1981

The Board, however, is not powerless to set equivalent standards to the high standards clearly contemplated by the language of the interim permit. … Since the Board’s showing in this respect is clearly inadequate its reliance on standard provision No. 6 is misplaced.

Theroux v. State of California

152 Cal. App. 3d 1 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 17, 1984

Cory, supra, 28 Cal.3d 562 , our legislative brethren were more fearful that clearly retroactive salary adjustments would be judicially rejected than they were anxious to deprive any who had labored in the service of the … In fact, the Assembly Office of Research report, supplied us by appellant, expressly advised: “Current law requires the State Personnel Board (SPB), in establishing state salary ranges, to consider the prevailing wage rates

Adoption of X.D.

California Court of Appeal · Sep 29, 2025

After further exchange, the court asked once more, “But was the phone number of [Raymon] established? Did you establish this is his phone number?” … When the mother was approximately six months pregnant, the father filed a petition to establish a parental relationship and sought a DNA test to establish his paternity. (Ibid.)

Magliulo v. Superior Court

47 Cal. App. 3d 760 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 30, 1975

(Hull) (1952) 38 Cal.2d 659, 671 [ 242 P.2d 311 ] [qualified by subdivision (g) of section 3600, and Mathews v. Workmen’s Comp. Appeals Bd., supra, 6 Cal.3d 719, 728-737 ]; Hanna, Cal. … But, as already noted, the ‘exclusive remedy’ provisions of section 3601 nowhere extend the employer’s immunity to cover the compensation insurer.