Case law

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.

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.)

People v. Ellena

67 Cal. App. 683 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 14, 1924

The first point made for reversal of the judgment is that the corpus delicti was not established. … After defendant’s objection to the introduction of the map was overruled, a great deal of evidence was received, without objection from any source, which clearly identified the map and authorized its use as an exhibit in

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

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.

California Department of Corrections v. State Personnel Board

18 Cal. Rptr. 3d 390 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 3, 2004

Braemar Country Club, Inc. (2003) 29 Cal.4th 1019, 1022, 1026 [ 130 Cal.Rptr.2d 662 , 63 P.3d 220 ] (Colmenares).) “ ‘[I]t is an established canon of interpretation that statutes are not to be given a retrospective operation … unless it is clearly made to appear that such was the legislative intent.’ ” (Evangelatos v.

Montgomery v. Board of Retirement

33 Cal. App. 3d 447 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 13, 1973

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution reads in pertinent part: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; . . ,” 1 In People v. … “The United States Supreme Court reversed, finding, first, that the denial of compensation benefits clearly constituted a burden upon the free exercise of appellant’s religion.

Vann v. City and County of S.F.

California Court of Appeal · Dec 12, 2023

(Recommendation Relating to Sovereign Immunity (Jan. 1963) Cal. Law Revision Com. com., Gov. Code, § 811.2, 1 Cal. … The Sixth District held that the regional team did not qualify as an “ ‘employer’ ” under Labor Code section 3300, which includes “ ‘[e]ach county, city, district, and all public and quasi public corporations and public agencies

People v. Kelly

17 Cal. App. 447 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 13, 1911

It must be presumed that the official reporter had duly qualified by taking his official oath to faithfully discharge his duties. It was not necessary that he be sworn at the preliminary hearing. … We are clearly of the opinion that we cannot say that the error now being considered, conceding it to have been error, “has resulted in a miscarriage of justice.” The judgment and order are affirmed.

In Re Melendez

37 Cal. App. 3d 967 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 15, 1974

; (2) if she could not qualify, the testimony of the 11-year-old girl would be uncorroborated; and (3) substantial time had elapsed between the crimes and the making of a report. … Brewer, supra, 408 U.S. 471 , in which the United States Supreme Court established (with prospective application) the requirement that a parolee be accorded a preliminary and a final hearing before revocation of parole.

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.

People v. Pacchioli

9 Cal. App. 4th 1331 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 25, 1992

And where you have effectively a legislative compulsion to testify you must constitutionally have use immunity co-extensive with the compelled testimony. [][] Thus the court there reached the conclusion that you had a statutory … criminal trial to produce sufficient evidence to establish the defendant’s guilt before he must decide whether to remain silent or to testify in his own behalf.

Ludlow v. Ludlow

89 Cal. App. 2d 610 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 10, 1949

The award of custody to plaintiff by the decree sufficiently established her fitness to have custody. … The modifying order of July, 1938, established the fitness of defendant, and the later contest did not turn upon that issue.

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).)

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”].)

Agnew v. State Board of Equalization

36 Cal. Rptr. 3d 464 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 7, 2005

AGNEW HAS FAILED TO ESTABLISH HE WAS ENTITLED TO AN AWARD OF ATTORNEY FEES UNDER THE GENERAL COST STATUTES. … However, the rule provides some leeway in the event no party has clearly prevailed in the Court of Appeal.

Bemis v. Bemis

89 Cal. App. 2d 80 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 8, 1948

When facts are established which clearly make applicable the quoted provision of the section that custody should be awarded to the mother, it is not within the discretion of the court to ignore it. … welfare of the child clearly requires it.

People v. Coyer

142 Cal. App. 3d 839 · California Court of Appeal · May 10, 1983

Nonetheless, an individual subject to criminal or quasi-criminal proceedings of any sort may perceive all these entities as forming a single law enforcement establishment. … Even in civil appeals "factfinding under rule 23 is an extraordinary procedure to be used sparingly and only in a case clearly calling for it...." ( Jacobs v. State Bd. of Optometry (1978) 81 Cal.

People v. Weger

251 Cal. App. 2d 584 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 5, 1967

Section 647, subdivision (e) is not Constitutionally Vague and Uncertain Defendant contends that section 647, subdivision (e), of the Penal Code, is vague and uncertain and fails to establish clearly defined standards of … It strikes a balance between a person’s interest in immunity from police interference and the community’s interest in law enforcement.

Citizens for Restoration of L Street v. City of Fresno

229 Cal. App. 4th 340 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 29, 2014

Second, the City argues that Valley Advocates clearly established that the fair argument standard does not apply an agency’s discretionary determination regarding whether the “resource” at issue is historic for purposes of … Thus, a man-made building would qualify as part of the environment if it is an object of historic significance.