Case law

Public Employees Assn. v. Board of Supervisors

167 Cal. App. 3d 797 · California Court of Appeal · May 1, 1985

Opinion BROWN (G. A.), P. J. … Appellant alleges violations of certain provisions of the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (Gov.

Sultan Turkish Bath v. Board Police Comrs.

169 Cal. App. 2d 188 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 27, 1959

Board, 108 Cal.App.2d 48, 49 [ 238 P.2d 23 ].) [3] In reviewing proceedings before the board this court is bound to disregard all evidence contrary to that received in support of the findings of the board. (Thompson v. … (Wotton v.

People Ex Rel. Department of Water Resources v. Brown

255 Cal. App. 2d 597 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 1, 1967

The rule, which has been stated in many cases in varying ways, is exemplified in People v. … (Coburn v. Townsend, 103 Cal. 233, 236 [ 37 P. 202 ]; City of Los Angeles v. Abbott, 217 Cal. 184, 194 [ 17 P.2d 993 ] ; La Mesa-Spring Valley School Dist. v.

Allen v. California Board of Barber Examiners

25 Cal. App. 3d 1014 · California Court of Appeal · May 30, 1972

In State Board v. … An alternative basis of decision by the majority in State Board v.

Rodeo Sanitary District v. Board of Supervisors

84 Cal. Rptr. 2d 601 · California Court of Appeal · May 10, 1999

Governing Board (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 1177, 1182 [ 249 Cal.Rptr. 161 ]; Bell Gardens Bicycle Club v. Department of Justice (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 717, 741, fn. 6 [ 42 Cal.Rptr.2d 730 ].) … In City of Fresno v.

Rondon v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board

60 Cal. Rptr. 3d 295 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 11, 2007

The Agencies Both the Department and the Board are “constitutional agencies upon which limited judicial powers have been conferred.” (Walker v. Munro (1960) 178 Cal.App.2d 67, 73 [ 2 Cal.Rptr. 737 ]; see also Martin v. … (Cf., e.g., Nasha v.

Public Employment Relations Board v. Superior Court

13 Cal. App. 4th 1816 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 10, 1993

The doctrinal headwaters of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) cases, relied upon by the Board, is to be found in Myers v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. (1938) 303 U.S. 41 [ 82 L.Ed. 638 , 58 S.Ct. 459 ]. … In United States v.

Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation v. State Personnel Board

238 Cal. App. 4th 710 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 10, 2015

a question of law is presented, we undertake a de novo review of the Board’s ruling (Pollak v. … (Wiles v. State Personnel Board (1942) 19 Cal.2d 344, 347 (Wiles); see § 19172.)

Farron v. City and County of San Francisco

216 Cal. App. 3d 1071 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 20, 1989

(County of Madera v. … The term, “official capacity,” is not defined in the Brown Act. The Attorney General and Division Three of this District, however, have addressed *1076 the issue. (Yoffie v.

Garrett Corp. v. State Board of Equalization

189 Cal. App. 2d 504 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 28, 1961

(City of Pomona v. State Board of Equalization, 53 Cal.2d 305, 309 [ 1 Cal.Rptr. 489 , 347 P.2d 904 ].) … Co. v. State Board of Equalization, 51 Cal.2d 531, 539 [ 334 P.2d 907 ].) “Exemptions from taxation must be found in the statute.” (Market St. Ry. Co. v.

Frazier v. Tulare County Board of Retirement

42 Cal. App. 3d 1046 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 8, 1974

(Packer v. Board of Retirement, 35 Cal.2d 212, 216 [ 217 P.2d 660 ].) Thus, Dorothy or Mary’s right to recover death benefits is predicated on a derivative right through Clarence as a member of the retirement system. … Board of Retirement, supra, 35 Cal.2d 212, 218-219 .)

Mapo, Inc. v. State Board of Equalization

53 Cal. App. 3d 245 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 25, 1975

Thus in Valier Coal Company v. … Productions thus fully complied with the spirit of the Board’s contemporaneous interpretation of section 6006, an interpretation which we are entitled to weigh in construing the statute. (Coca-Cola Co. v.

Mission Ins. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

123 Cal. App. 3d 211 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 28, 1981

In Empire Star Mines Co. v. Cal. Emp. … In LeVesque v. Workmen’s Comp. App.

Industrial Indemnity Co. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

85 Cal. App. 3d 1028 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 1, 1978

After a hearing before the board, the WCAB concluded that Duncan and Brown were entitled to the benefits they sought. … The board and the applicants rely upon cases such as Jenkins v. Workmen’s Comp. Appeals Bd. (1973) 31 Cal.App.3d 259 [ 107 Cal.Rptr. 130 ], and State Comp. Ins. Fund v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd.

Paez v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board

222 Cal. App. 3d 1025 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 10, 1990

Paez, doing business as El Naco Beer Bar, seeks review of a final order of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board suspending his on-sale beer license for 60 days, with 20 days stayed, for having served an alcoholic … Code (1986 ed.) p. 26 thereto; People v. Cole (1956) 47 Cal.2d 99, 105 [ 301 P.2d 854 , 56 A.L.R.2d 1435 ]; People v. Polk (1964) 61 Cal.2d 217, 233 [ 37 Cal.Rptr. 753 , 390 P.2d 641 ]; *1027 Corn v.

Cambell Industries v. State Board of Equalization

167 Cal. App. 3d 863 · California Court of Appeal · May 3, 1985

The ultimate resolution, however, of whether the Board has correctly interpreted its own regulations rests with the courts. (Ontario Community Foundations, Inc. v. … In resolving the issue, we preliminarily note that the Board’s interpretation of its own regulations finds support in Union Oil Co. v. State Bd. of Equal. (1963) 60 Cal.2d 441 [ 34 Cal.Rptr. 872 , 386 P.2d 496 ].

Market Basket v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

86 Cal. App. 3d 137 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 31, 1978

In resolving the issue of apportionment, the board must rely upon expert medical opinion. (Zemke v. Workers’ Comp. App. … The board has adopted section 10606 of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board Rules of Practice and Procedure (Cal. Admin.

Torrance Education Assn. v. Board of Education

21 Cal. App. 3d 589 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 29, 1971

The history and purposes of the Winton Act are reviewed in Berkeley Teachers Assn. v. Board of Education (1967) 254 Cal.App.2d 660 [ 62 Cal.Rptr. 515 ] and California Federation of Teachers v. … (See Anderson v. Stansbury (1952) 38 Cal.2d 707, 717 [ 242 P.2d 305 ]; Haley v. L. A. County Flood Control Dist. (1959) 172 Cal.App.2d 285, 292 [ 342 P.2d 476 ].) The judgment is affirmed.

Pandol & Sons v. Agricultural Labor Relations Board

98 Cal. App. 3d 580 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 9, 1979

See also National Labor Relations Board v. … In National Labor Relations Board v.

Honeywell, Inc. v. State Board of Equalization

128 Cal. App. 3d 739 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 11, 1982

(People v. Schwartz (1947) 31 Cal.2d 59, 64 [ 187 P.2d 12 ]; Maganini v. Quinn (1950) 99 Cal.App.2d 1, 8 [ 221 P.2d 241 ].) … He cannot assert error and thus shift to the state the burden to justify the tax. .. . ” (Hall v. Franchise Tax Board (1966) 244 Cal.App.2d 843, 848 [ 53 Cal.Rptr. 597 ].)