Case law

Hobart Estate Co. v. State Board of Equalization

1 Cal. App. 2d 328 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 10, 1934

In the case of Hobart Estate Co. et al. v. Waters, 72 Cal. App. … of Equalization, to wit: That the counties and the State Board of Equalization should restrict their assessments and levies, first; by the counties to “Dual Use Property”, and, second; by the State Board of Equalization

Franchise Tax Board v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.

87 Cal. App. 3d 878 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 27, 1978

(See Feinberg v. One Doe Co. (1939) 14 Cal.2d 24, 27 [ 92 P.2d 640 ]; Paramount Pictures Corp. v. Davis (1964) 228 Cal.App.2d 827, 835-836 [ 39 Cal.Rptr. 791 ].) … (Lord v. Garland (1946) 27 Cal.2d 840, 848 [ 168 P.2d 5 ]; Colvig v. RKO *884 General, Inc. (1965) 232 Cal.App.2d 56, 70-71 [ 42 Cal.Rptr. 473 ]; National Auto. Ins. Co. v.

County of Sonoma v. State Board of Equalization

195 Cal. App. 3d 982 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 28, 1987

(Select Base Materials v. Board of Equal (1959) 51 Cal.2d 640, 645 [ 335 P.2d 672 ].) … (See e.g., Honey Springs Homeowners Assn. v. Board of Supervisors (1984) 157 Cal.App.3d 1122, 1137 [ 203 Cal.Rptr. 886 ]; J. Paul Getty Museum v.

Matson Navigation Co. v. State Board of Equalization

136 Cal. App. 2d 577 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 27, 1955

Spaulding & Bros. v. Edwards, 262 U.S. 66 [ 43 S.Ct. 485 , 67 L.Ed. 865 ]; and to Richfield Oil Corp. v. … A. v.

Bullard v. San Francisco Residential Rent Stabilization Board

130 Cal. Rptr. 2d 819 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 21, 2003

(e); DeZerega v. Meggs (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 28, 40-41 [ 99 Cal.Rptr.2d 366 ].) … (Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley (1976) 17 Cal.3d 129, 141 [ 130 Cal.Rptr. 465 , 550 P.2d 1001 ]; Sherwin-Williams Co. v. City of Los Angeles (1993) 4 Cal.4th 893, 897-898 [ 16 Cal.Rptr.2d 215 , 844 P.2d 534 ].)

Rice v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board

118 Cal. App. 3d 30 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 14, 1981

In Coulter v. … In Vesely v.

Wheeler & Beaton v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

40 Cal. App. 4th 389 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 16, 1995

Relying on LeBoeuf v. Workers’ Comp. … (Goler v. W & J Sloane Company, supra, 44 Cal.Comp.Cases at p. 1069.) The Board indicated that basing fees on the actual value of the award would result in a windfall to attorneys. In Lawrence Drasin & Associates v.

Foster v. Board of Medical Quality Assurance

227 Cal. App. 3d 1606 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 24, 1991

The board need not wait until malpractice is alleged. 6 In Wilkinson v. … (See Windham v. Board of Medical Quality Assurance, supra, 104 Cal.App.3d at p. 470 .)

County of Tuolumne v. State Board of Equalization

206 Cal. App. 2d 352 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 1, 1962

In the same volume in which Weed v. Snook is reported, we find the case of Bakersfield & Fresno Oil Co. v. … J., and Brown, J., concurred.

Kern County Water Agency v. Board of Supervisors

96 Cal. App. 3d 874 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 13, 1979

The board approved that request, conditioned on the *878 agency securing a final court order adjudicating the legality of such assessment and levy. … The board has appealed. We affirm the judgment except as to a minor portion of the taxes involved.

City of Gilroy v. State Board of Equalization

212 Cal. App. 3d 589 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 26, 1989

(Morro Hills Community Services Dist. v. Board of Supervisors (1978) 78 Cal.App.3d 765, 773 [144 Cal.Rptr. *598 778].) … (County of Sonoma v. State Board of Equalization, supra, 195 Cal.App.3d at pp. 989-990.)

City of Oakland v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

259 Cal. App. 2d 163 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 20, 1968

(See City of Los Angeles v. Industrial Acc. Com (Fraide), 63 Cal.2d 242 [ 46 Cal.Rptr. 97 , 404 P.2d 801 ]; Stafford v. Los Angeles etc. Retirement Board, 42 Cal.2d 795 [ 270 P.2d 12 ]; Lyons v. … In French v.

Great Western Power Co. v. Board of Supervisors

21 Cal. App. 146 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 10, 1913

It is sufficient to refer to the following decisions of our supreme court: Whitney v. Board of Delegates, 14 Cal. 479 ; Levee District No. 9 v. Farmer, 101 Cal. 178 , [23 L. R. A. 388, 35 Pac. 569 ] ; Stumpf v. … In Stumpf v. Board of Supervisors, 131 Cal. 364 , [ 82 Am. St.

City of Oakland v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

120 Cal. Rptr. 2d 873 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 11, 2002

(Id. at p. 1184; see also Lockheed Martin Corp. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2002) 96 Cal.App.4th 1237 [ 117 Cal.Rptr.2d 865 ].) IV. Citing two Board decisions (Larch v. … Thus, we agree with the Board’s importation of the objective good faith standard from Cotran . The Board had earlier attempted to define good faith in its decision in Larch v.

Board of Medical Quality Assurance v. Superior Court

114 Cal. App. 3d 272 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 31, 1980

Opinion BROWN (G. A.), P. J. Real party in interest, Charles D. … (D’Amico v. Board of Medical Examiners, supra, 11 Cal.3d 1, 17-18 .) As was observed in Hardy v.

Chemed Corp. v. State Board of Equalization

192 Cal. App. 3d 967 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 3, 1987

Finally, Chemed cites Ontario Community Foundations, Inc. v. … (Santa Fe Transp. v. State Board of Equal. (1959) 51 Cal.2d 531, 539 [ 334 P.2d 907 ].)

American Airlines, Inc. v. State Board of Equalization

216 Cal. App. 2d 180 · California Court of Appeal · May 15, 1963

(Douglas Aircraft Co., Inc. v. Johnson, 13 Cal.2d 545 [90 P.2d 572]; Anders v. State Board of Equalization, 82 Cal.App.2d 88 [ 185 P.2d 883 ]; Brandtjen & Kluge, Inc. v. … (See Edelman v. Boeing Air Transport, 289 U.S. 249 [ 53 S.Ct. 591 , 11 L.Ed. 1155 ]; Atchison, etc. Ry. Co. v. State Board of Equalization, 139 Cal.App.2d 411 [ 294 P.2d 181 ]; Flying Tiger Line v.

Ri-Joyce, Inc. v. New Motor Vehicle Board

2 Cal. App. 4th 445 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 7, 1992

The Board found this court’s decision in BMW of North America, Inc. v. New Motor Vehicle Bd. (1984) 162 Cal.App.3d 980 [ 209 Cal.Rptr. 50 ] (hereafter BMW or the BMW case), to be controlling and dismissed the protest. … (Bleecher v. Conte (1981) 29 Cal.3d 345, 352-353 [ 213 Cal.Rptr. 852 , 698 P.2d 1154 ]; Larwin-Southem California, Inc. v. JGB Investment Co. (1979) 101 Cal.App.3d 626, 638-639 [ 162 Cal.Rptr. 52 ]; Guntert v.

Lindsay v. County of San Diego Retirement Board

231 Cal. App. 2d 156 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 11, 1964

Retirement Board, 131 Cal.App.2d 804 [ 281 P.2d 349 ]; Loveland v. City of Oakland, 80 Cal.App.2d 31 [ 180 P.2d 937 ]; Marshall v. City of Oakland, 92 Cal.App.2d 593 [ 207 P.2d 882 ].) … Coughlin, J., and Brown (Gerald), J., concurred.

Diageo-Guinness Usa, Inc. v. Board of Equalization

205 Cal. App. 4th 907 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 30, 2012

In Ramirez v. … (Brown v. Kelly Broadcasting Co. (1989) 48 Cal.3d 711, 724 [ 257 Cal.Rptr. 708 , 771 P.2d 406 ].) We determine such intent by looting first to the words of the enactment, giving them their usual and ordinary meaning.