Case law

Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

187 Cal. App. 3d 922 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 8, 1986

(Id. at p. 260.) *931 Ezzy , however, did not clearly interpret the “expressly or impliedly required” language of subdivision (a)(8). … This evidence does not establish a subjectively felt pressure.

Estate of Smith

61 Cal. App. 4th 259 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 3, 1998

“If living” and “if not living” are clearly alternative conditions, not sequential ones. … Nor could the decedent have thought she was creating a trust for the benefit of her spouse by employing language establishing “. . .

Levitz Furniture Co. of the Pac., Inc. v. Wingtip Commc'ns, Inc.

103 Cal. Rptr. 2d 656 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 31, 2001

Section 1161 provides: “A tenant of real property, for a term less than life, or the executor or administrator of his or her estate heretofore qualified and now acting or hereafter to be qualified and act, is guilty of unlawful … First, Bevill does not establish a rule that the mere inclusion of rent due more than a year before a three-day notice automatically invalidates the notice. That point was conceded by Bevill.

Bank of America v. State Board of Equalization

209 Cal. App. 2d 780 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 20, 1962

It also seeks to reach such property where the taxable event of a sales tax, i.e., the sale, occurs outside of this state or where such property is immune from the sales tax because of the commerce clause. … Clearly, the acceptance of this order by the Bank would constitute an acceptance of the depositor’s order, and hence the consummation of a contract of sale.

Clay v. Tryk

177 Cal. App. 3d 119 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 3, 1986

“Shared housing” does not include situations where an established or proven landlord-tenant relationship exists. … This latitude in administering relief was qualified in Mooney v.

State of Cal. Ex Rel. State Pub. Wks. Bd. v. Wherity

275 Cal. App. 2d 241 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 28, 1969

Code, § 816) to establish land value and ail income approach 1 to establish “carrier” value. 2 Holloway relied upon 10 sales (which in his opinion were “comparables”) to reach an opinion as to land value. … Rather, he clearly and earnestly pointed out that his ruling was predicated upon his interpretation of section 813 and not upon a need or desire to exclude the witness’ testimony because of its cumulative or repetitive nature

McMahon v. City of Los Angeles

172 Cal. App. 4th 1324 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 8, 2009

When a complaint is unfounded, it “means that the investigation clearly established that the allegation is not true. [][]... … ‘Exonerated’ means that the investigation clearly established that the actions of the peace or custodial officer that formed the basis for the complaint are not violations of law or department policy.” (Pen.

Clark v. Tulare Lake Dredging Co.

14 Cal. App. 414 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 31, 1910

I told him that we paid $40 a month and board to beginners—we paid $60 a month at that time to experienced lever-men; that a man qualifying himself as lever-man would get a raise in pay. . . . … the power of appellate tribunals in this state to the consideration of questions of law only, can lead to no other conclusion than that the evidence displayed before us is sufficient to render the conclusion of the jury immune

People v. MISA

44 Cal. Rptr. 3d 805 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 22, 2006

We conclude that under the standards for establishing torture as set forth by California Supreme Court precedents, Misa’s argument is not well taken. … In Williams , the defendant was convicted of multiple felonies that qualified as serious or violent and was found to have suffered from two prior felonies that also qualified as strikes.

Pruett v. Burr

118 Cal. App. 2d 188 · California Court of Appeal · May 27, 1953

It then stated that the doctrine was applied in certain specific unusual situations where there was clearly a probability that one or more of several persons was negligent but where the plaintiff was unable to point out which … There .is no evidence by any person from that department or anyone qualified to testify to this effect.

City of Modesto v. National Med, Inc.

27 Cal. Rptr. 3d 215 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 18, 2005

given its taxpayers no indication of what *524 records they were required to maintain to establish this constitutional right.” … Second, the legislative body must act promptly and establish only a modest period of retroactivity. (Ibid.) In amending the business license tax ordinance, the City Council’s purpose was clearly legitimate.

Fredenburg v. City of Fremont

14 Cal. Rptr. 3d 437 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 11, 2004

The Attorney General has defined a serious sex offender as *417 one convicted of certain offenses, including child molestation, who does not have the aggravated criminal record sufficient to qualify him as a high-risk offender … In light of this conclusion, we need not discuss any issue of immunity. 7 We close with an observation.

Rodas v. Dept. of Transportation CA4/1

California Court of Appeal · Dec 29, 2023

Concealed Trap The second Tansavatdi factor to establish liability for failure to warn requires a plaintiff to establish “the dangerous condition qualified as a concealed trap, i.e., ‘would not [have been] reasonably … Although the verdict form did not ask whether the dangerous condition qualified as a concealed trap, the jury was instructed with the standard jury instruction for signage immunity under section 830.8, which stated, “A public

P. W. Stephens, Inc. v. State Compensation Insurance Fund

21 Cal. App. 4th 1833 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 28, 1994

(a)), the Legislature has also established it as a state agency with “unique characteristics” and one which is exempt from many of the immunities, requirements, restrictions and procedures applicable generally to state agencies … If applied, they shall clearly be shown separately from the basic Manual rates and the experience modification.” (Italics added.)

Bell v. H.F. Cox, Inc.

209 Cal. App. 4th 62 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 5, 2012

It found that all of Cox’s drivers and all of its trucks were qualified for interstate hauls and that some drivers had been randomly assigned to interstate routes. … The court noted that, in requesting volunteers, Cox made it clear that no driver was immune from being assigned to drive an interstate route.

Rothman v. Jackson

49 Cal. App. 4th 1134 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 1, 1996

In Washer , the bank discharged Washer and was ordered by the National Labor Relations Board to reinstate him, whereupon a bank vice-president made a statement to the press clearly implying that Washer had been fired for … Nevertheless, Albertson did not overrule the *1142 precedent established by Washer respecting statements to the public at large through the press. Far from it.

Larimer v. Smith

130 Cal. App. 98 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 27, 1933

The loss of the original was sufficiently established. There is evidence that it was delivered to the appellant, who denies that he ever had possession of the instrument. … These rulings are harmless for the reason that the fact thus sought to be elicited was otherwise fully established. The excluded answers would have been merely cumulative.

Burke v. Superior Court

128 Cal. App. 3d 661 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 9, 1982

Standing is clearly not limited to persons discriminated against. … Having alleged “injury in his business” by reason of discrimination in violation of Business and Professions Code section 16721, petitioners have established standing. 6 General Motors also contends that the existence of

In re Moore

California Court of Appeal · Aug 31, 2021

The prosecutor did not provide Packard with immunity for the robbery-homicide and indicated that if the evidence showed Packard “was involved in the actual robbery/homicide” then the “deal . . . would be off.” … Thus, a defendant who was merely the “getaway driver in an armed robbery” that resulted in death did not qualify for the death penalty.

People v. Jones

172 Cal. App. 4th 815 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 25, 2009

To prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, a defendant must also establish counsel's performance prejudiced his defense. ( Id. at p. 687.) … First, `"[t]he burden is on the party attacking the sentence to clearly show that the sentencing decision was irrational or arbitrary. [Citation.]