Case law

Ross v. Title Guarantee & Trust Co.

136 Cal. App. 393 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 25, 1934

This section is in the following language: “Qualified indorsement. A qualified indorsement constitutes the indorser a mere assignor of the title to the instrument. … This rule is clearly established by the great weight of authority in the United States and is in conformity with reason and principle (1 Daniel on Negotiable Instruments, 6th ed., p. 778; Brannan’s Negotiable Instruments

Childs v. County of Santa Barbara

8 Cal. Rptr. 3d 823 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 22, 2004

Clearly, a trier of fact should be entitled to consider Tatiana’s conduct in causing the accident, but the evidence offered in support of the County’s summary judgment motion is insufficient to establish that her conduct … The cases establish that the latter type of risk, posed by a ski resort’s negligence, clearly is not a risk (inherent in the sport) that is assumed by a participant.” (Id., at p. 316.)

National Automobile & Casualty Insurance v. Downey

98 Cal. App. 2d 586 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 25, 1950

Each hearing officer shall have been admitted to practice law in this State for at least five years immediately preceding his appointment and shall possess any additional qualifications established by the State Personnel … Consequently said deputy was not qualified to act as a hearing officer within the meaning of section 11502 of the Government Code.

Claude T. Lindsay, Inc. v. Crocker-Anglo National Bank

207 Cal. App. 2d 199 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 29, 1962

establish, by an order for payment of the claim. … Since the decided eases clearly establish that interest arises on a non-interest-bearing claim *204 only from the date of an order for payment, and no order for payment has ever been made here, the proposed amendment could

People v. Roth

California Court of Appeal · Nov 21, 2017

establishment. … establishment.

People v. Force

170 Cal. App. 4th 797 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 26, 2009

Louisiana (1992) 504 U.S. 71 [ 118 L.Ed.2d 437 , 112 S.Ct. 1780 ], but that case is clearly distinguishable. … Much of the evidence cited by defense counsel in support of the juror information disclosure petition involves clearly inadmissible information.

Richelle L. v. Roman Catholic Archbishop

130 Cal. Rptr. 2d 601 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 17, 2003

These constitutional provisions guarantee the free exercise of religion and bar laws respecting an establishment of religion. … The complaint does, however, suffer another deficiency, and it is one that clearly cannot be cured by amendment.

Professional Engineers in California Government v. State Personnel Board

90 Cal. App. 4th 678 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 11, 2001

qualified or as to relative level of qualification. … In a concise argument the Engineers urge: “Appointments to CEA positions through ‘transfer’ are clearly unconstitutional. Article VII, Section 1(b) makes ‘competitive examination’ mandatory.

Elmquist v. Lock

194 Cal. App. 2d 372 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 28, 1961

The construction of the agreement by the trial court is clearly a correct one. … It is the purpose of section 24076 to prevent a transfer of ownership by any means other than the procedure, compliance with which would limit transfers to those who are qualified to hold licenses. In Citrigno v.

Ralphs Grocery Co. v. Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen, Local No. 439

98 Cal. App. 2d 539 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 24, 1950

established and were understood between appellant and respondents and among all employers and employees engaged in retailing fresh meat products. … The complaint states a clearly defined controversy. • A declaration of appellant’s rights under the contract should be made by judicial pronouncement.

Palmer v. Regents of University of California

132 Cal. Rptr. 2d 567 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 8, 2003

other, better qualified applicants for the positions available.” … Palmer was told her “knowledge and ability qualify you [for] this position.”

People v. Brown

California Court of Appeal · Aug 10, 2017

[Citation.][7] However, impossibility of conviction is not the same as innocence, and if the guilt of two is established, one may be convicted although the other may be protected by immunity or some other … For example, the acts of a coconspirator who has been granted prosecutorial immunity may be considered in establishing the culpability of other coconspirators. [Citations.]

Roemer v. Retail Credit Co.

44 Cal. App. 3d 926 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 29, 1975

The malice necessary to defeat a qualified privilege is “actual malice” which is established by a showing that the publication was motivated by hatred or ill will towards the plaintiff or by a showing that the defendant lacked … And, as a matter of policy “The discretion of the trial court should be upheld unless clearly abused” (3 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (2d ed.) § 1040, p. 2619).

People v. Delgado CA6

California Court of Appeal · Apr 21, 2015

The Ninth Circuit upheld the denial of qualified immunity to the parole officer, 5 Relying on Antelope, defendant asserts that submission to a polygraph examination under subdivision (b)(3) violates the … Miller, supra, 208 Cal.App.3d 1311, 1315.) 8 concluding that the “ ‘right to be free from coercive interrogation’ ” was clearly established under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments

West Coast Poultry Co. v. Glasner

231 Cal. App. 2d 747 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 20, 1965

Hebraic law requires that only an orthodox Rabbi is qualified to determine if poultry is kosher according to Hebraic Orthodox religious requirements. … Hebraic law provides that a *750 lawfully ordained orthodox Rabbi is privileged to enter any kosher business establishment to inspect whether the establishment adheres to kosher standards.

Colusa & Hamilton Railroad v. Glenn

25 Cal. App. 634 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 27, 1914

It would be an utter waste of time and effort to consider the appeal at length as the case comes clearly within the well-established principle that when evidence is conflicting the granting or refusing of a new trial rests … The inquiry should, of course, be very carefully conducted and none but qualified witnesses should be allowed to express an opinion for the assistance of the jury.

Ratkovich v. City of San Bruno

245 Cal. App. 2d 870 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 26, 1966

However, the evidence considered in the light most favorable to plaintiff falls far short of establishing such necessity. … The court excluded the testimony principally because Van Dusen had not been qualified as an expert. 18 The court seemed to recognize that Mills had been qualified as an expert but refused to receive any proof of damage based

First National Bank v. Faris

89 Cal. App. 2d 515 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 4, 1949

In that case, the first words giving the property were not qualified. Not only was a trust not mentioned but the executors were not even authorized to hold the property or to do anything with it. … It was held that there was nothing anywhere in the will to indicate an intention to establish a trust. In Estate of Yates, the fifth subdivision of the will gave $1,000 to Roseoe Smith.

Schmidlin v. City of Palo Alto

69 Cal. Rptr. 3d 365 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 2, 2008

Qualified Immunity Defendants raise several arguments to the effect that the trial court erred in not sustaining their defense of qualified immunity. … So that was clearly not what I was trying to do.”

Ashley v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

37 Cal. App. 4th 320 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 1, 1995

Industrial causation in the first instance is established when it is determined that the injury has arisen out of the employment and during the course of employment. … “Subsequent” clearly means later in time than the injury which is subject to rating. “Injury” is-generally defined as “hurt,” or “damage,” or “harm.”