Case law

Franklin Mint Co. v. Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

184 Cal. App. 4th 313 · California Court of Appeal · May 3, 2010

But a lawyer is not immune from liability for malicious prosecution simply because the general area of law at issue is complex and there is no case law with the same facts that establishes that the underlying claim was untenable … But the actual advertisements, which were attached to the complaint, clearly do not make the representation alleged, and no reasonable attorney could argue that the advertisements could be construed to even suggest that all

Freitas v. Peerless Stages, Inc.

108 Cal. App. 2d 749 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 18, 1952

Independent of this reasoning, the cases in California clearly establish that pleading negligence in the fashion above set forth does not preclude the plaintiff from relying upon the doctrine. … The jury was instructed clearly and properly on the doctrine of contributory negligence.

Garcia v. Superior Court

156 Cal. App. 3d 670 · California Court of Appeal · May 30, 1984

Solberg , however, is clearly distinguishable from the instant case. … Although the underlying issue in Solberg was judicial disqualification, Solberg did not involve the proceedings established in section 170, subdivision (e).

Boyer v. Ventura County

California Court of Appeal · Mar 18, 2019

Four days later, Lunn advised appellant that he had not submitted documentation establishing appellant’s qualifications to run for county sheriff, as required by California Elections Code section 13.5 and Government Code … “[A] statute is presumed to be constitutional and . . . must be upheld unless its unconstitutionality ‘clearly, positively and unmistakably appears.’ [Citations.]” (Hale v. Morgan (1978) 22 Cal.3d 388, 404.)

Gale v. Superior Court

19 Cal. Rptr. 3d 554 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 22, 2004

It will therefore clearly not suffice for purposes of the lis pendens statute to merely check item 5c of the petition form without specifying the property on which the claim is made. 6 In this proceeding Wife lays heavy emphasis … divorce on innocent parties, including employees of family-owned businesses. 3 Of course, just because you can file a notice of lis pendens because you properly pled a real property claim doesn’t mean your lis pendens is immune

People v. Verducci

243 Cal. App. 4th 952 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 11, 2016

The decision should be reversed on appeal only when it clearly appears that the exercise of discretion was mistaken.” (Abatti, at p. 522.) … in relation to other evidence to establish the identity of the speaker”].)17 17 Verducci’s reliance on People v.

Desert Sun Publishing Co. v. Superior Court

97 Cal. App. 3d 49 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 19, 1979

This letter, distasteful, offensive and unpleasant though it may be to Block, clearly falls within the protected opinion type of political comment. … Cleveland to the public office which he is so well qualified to fill and remand Mr. Blaine to the private status which he is admirably fitted to adorn.”

Elsey v. Domecq

114 Cal. App. 42 · California Court of Appeal · May 7, 1931

The jury were elsewhere clearly instructed that they were the exclusive judges of the weight and sufficiency of the evidence. … There being no evidence of any remote negligence on the part of plaintiff, the omission of the proper qualifying expression could not have been prejudicial. ’ ’ Plaintiff’s instruction number twenty-two is challenged because

City of California City v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

95 Cal. App. 3d 329 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 24, 1979

The following facts were established at the hearing: respondent testified that on the date of injury he was a safety member of the Public Employees’ Retirement System and was paying 9 percent of his gross salary to the Public … Retirement System . . . and excludes such employees of the . . . fire department whose principal duties are those of a telephone operator, clerk, stenographer, machinist, mechanic, or otherwise and whose functions do not clearly

People v. Foster

114 Cal. App. 3d 421 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 7, 1981

Clearly, Crocker Bank had a property interest in the Travel Queen. … The trial court clearly stated its reasons for admitting the evidence of the Titan burning and identity was not a reason cited.

Seibert Security Services, Inc. v. SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN BERNARDINO CTY.

18 Cal. App. 4th 394 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 3, 1993

(See Globe Immunity Co. v. … Such a “special relationship” exists between a business establishment and customers or invitees; the establishment is under an affirmative duty to take reasonable precautions to protect its patrons from criminal conduct by

Oliva v. Swoap

59 Cal. App. 3d 130 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 15, 1976

oral argument, plaintiffs took the position that the exception in subdivision (c) of section 11004 creates but a single contingency in which overpayments can be recovered; that the words “errors” and “changes” are each qualified … The grant adjustment procedure employed herein pursuant to regulations adopted by the Department is clearly authorized by statute. Accordingly, the trial court erred in granting plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment.

Boothby v. Town of Yreka City

117 Cal. App. 643 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 23, 1931

The plaintiff in this action was a duly qualified voter of the County of Siskiyou, residing within voting precinct No. 5. … In the instant case, however, the circumstances shown in the record go further and establish that the plaintiff in this action was at the polling-place in question, by the express invitation of the County of Siskiyou, notifying

Reiss v. Reiss

45 Cal. App. 2d 740 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 7, 1941

Max was appointed and qualified as the guardian of the estate of Rosa on March 4, 1935, and was substituted in the action as such guardian in the place and stead of the guardian ad litem. … establishes that Rosa wanted her half interest in the property vested in her and that she distinctly understood the conveyances were made to her son for the express purpose of breaking the joint tenancies.

People v. Von Villas

11 Cal. App. 4th 175 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 16, 1992

Ford alleges that the conversation qualifies as an “oral communication” as defined in 18 United States Code section 2510 (2). … through a grant of transactional immunity upon the request of the prosecution pursuant to section 1324, or a grant of “use immunity” through the court.

Lasky, Haas, Cohler & Munter v. Superior Court

172 Cal. App. 3d 264 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 19, 1985

While the Riggs distinction of Prudence-Bonds is not immune to question, we need not definitively analyze the distinction offered because, as pointed out, our contrary result rests upon our construction of the California … Finally, to aid the respondent in its in camera determination of what materials qualify for protection under the views expressed herein (Fellows v.

Crestwood Behavioral Health, Inc. v. Baass

California Court of Appeal · May 1, 2023

Skilled nursing facilities must meet certain performance criteria, placing them in either the second or third tier, to qualify for supplemental QASP payments. … Reynoso (2017) 10 Cal.App.5th 172, 179 [“Failure to provide proper headings forfeits issues that may be discussed in the brief but are not clearly identified by a heading”].)

TRC Operating Co. v. Chevron USA, Inc.

California Court of Appeal · Jun 21, 2024

Out-of-state crimes must be analyzed against California statutes to determine whether they would qualify, considering their elements and/or the facts admitted or established in the … Section 203 states “[a]ll persons are eligible and qualified to be prospective trial jurors.” (§ 203, subd. (a).)

McClain v. City of South Pasadena

155 Cal. App. 2d 423 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 22, 1957

Every intendment is to be indulged by the courts in favor of the validity of its exercise and unless the measure is clearly oppressive it will be deemed to be within the purview of that power. … Gilbert, 137 N.Y.S.2d 389 , the village of Larchmont established a parking'lot exclusively for the inhabitants of the municipality.

Cleland v. Superior Court

52 Cal. App. 2d 530 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 6, 1942

“It may be added that if the act could be thus construed, it would be clearly unconstitutional. … The term of office was definitely fixed and the duties are clearly prescribed.