Case law

People v. Maestas

204 Cal. App. 3d 1208 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 22, 1988

The Malley court held “that the same standard of objective reasonableness that we applied in the context of a suppression hearing in Leon, supra, defines the qualified immunity accorded an officer whose request for a warrant … As the trial court pointed out prior to commencement of the good faith hearing, it was the People’s burden to establish good faith.

Gayle v. Hamm

25 Cal. App. 3d 250 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 28, 1972

Consequently, the courts considering the petitions- for mandamus were able to make the determination that the proposed measure was clearly invalid beyond question, readily and with confidence. … If the number of qualified signatures is lacking, they want to go out and get the requisite signatures via a supplemental petition.

Olschewski v. Hudson

87 Cal. App. 282 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 5, 1927

Cas. 1918C, 1022, 161 Pac. 990 ], it is said: “To restrain a person lawfully engaged in a laundry business from receiving unlaundered goods from certain former patrons is to sanction, to that extent, the establishment of … Clearly the proceeding in conversion was not intended to reach so intangible, uncertain, and indefinite a property right.

Esposito v. Rodriguez

57 Cal. App. 2d 859 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 29, 1943

Gloria’s adoption by strangers severed her legal relationship toward her natural parents and established a new one with the foster parents, but her status as a relative by blood of the kindred of her parents was not altered … Lynn, supra, 118 Am.St.Rep. 672 , 686, that the adoption of a child does not deprive him of his right to inherit from his relatives by blood, unless the statute provides otherwise, and clearly this must be so.

People v. Cartwright

39 Cal. App. 4th 1123 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 30, 1995

Appeals Bd. (1993) 5 Cal.4th 382, 387 [ 20 Cal.Rptr.2d 523 , 853 P.2d 978 ]), and the Legislature clearly intended longer prison sentences for all defendants sentenced under the three strikes law. … It found: “The statute clearly mandates that each count of a multiple count conviction will be sentenced independently under subdivision (e).” (Id. at p. 602.)

Buzgheia v. Leasco Sierra Grove

60 Cal. App. 4th 374 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 22, 1997

Rushing paid Anderson to allow Rushing’s company to qualify for a swimming pool license, but Anderson did no work. (Pp. 601-602.) … The jury was instructed that Buzgheia had the burden to prove the facts necessary to establish his claim, that he had to have an RME as defined, and that “an individual such as Charles Laird is considered a ‘qualified’ RME

Tanner v. Superior Court

43 Cal. App. 2d 732 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 26, 1941

Best, petitioner qualified as administratrix of his estate. … In all such cases, the payment of counsel fees is dependent upon establishing the right of the common fund to the property which comprised the subject of the litigation.

Burroughs v. Precision Airmotive Corp.

93 Cal. Rptr. 2d 124 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 25, 2000

Plaintiffs appear to concede the logic that “GARA, which would immunize the manufacturer from liability for failure to warn, would also immunize a successor to the extent it has assumed such liability from the manufacturer … We conclude that plaintiffs have failed to establish a negligence cause of action based on an independent duty to warn theory of liability.

People v. Catalano

19 Cal. App. 3d 83 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 2, 1971

Neither a finding of defendant’s legal eligibility for the CRC program by the trial judge nor execution of a waiver to qualify him for commitment was contemplated by anyone, including defendant. … Schirn: Other than the statement made to the Court by your attorney, has anyone promised you any reward^ immunity, lesser punishment, or probation for making your plea? “The Defendant: No, sir. “Mr.

Northern California Carpenters Regional Council v. Warmington Hercules Associates

20 Cal. Rptr. 3d 918 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 22, 2004

Two years earlier, the Agency had adopted a Prevailing Wage Policy providing that workers on qualified construction projects would “be paid wages not less than the per diem rate determined to be the prevailing wage rate by … Ericsson Information Systems, Inc., supra, at pp. 123-124)—clearly “a large class of persons” within the meaning of Code of Civil Procedure section 425.17, subdivision (b)(2).

People v. Anderson

210 Cal. App. 3d 414 · California Court of Appeal · May 11, 1989

We believe that, like other factual determinations, it is for the jury to conclude what time period qualifies as “recent.” … Appellant further contends that the very giving of the instruction imposed upon the jury a conclusion that the property in the case qualified as “recently stolen.”

California Amplifier, Inc. v. RLI Ins. Co.

113 Cal. Rptr. 2d 915 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 3, 2001

The court noted that, since the safe harbor provision did not immunize forward-looking statements when there is actual knowledge of falsity, liability under section 25500 does not conflict with federal law. … “The first, a statement or omission known to be false or misleading and willfully made, clearly constitutes scienter.

City of Anaheim v. Pacific Bell Telephone Co.

14 Cal. Rptr. 3d 725 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 21, 2004

Defendant maintained that the district “[did] not qualify” under rule 32 because it was established for the sole benefit of the residents of the district. … It first noted that section 1759, subdivision (a) “is not intended to, and does not, immunize or insulate a public utility from any and all civil actions brought in superior court. [Citations.]”

Westcott v. Hamilton

202 Cal. App. 2d 261 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 9, 1962

Defendants predicate their claim of error on the fact that the court failed to then give BAJI No. 142, which interprets and qualifies the strict statutory language. … Even under the rule of Lewis , it is sufficient if some qualifying instruction is given.

City of San Diego v. Millan

127 Cal. App. 521 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 17, 1932

Liberty implies an absence of arbitrary restraint, not immunity from reasonable regulations and prohibitions imposed in the interests of the community. ... … This act clearly contemplates a purchase of bonds for a temporary period. The money from the Sutherland dam bonds will not be diverted from the purposes for which the bonds were authorized.

Yohner v. California Department of Justice

237 Cal. App. 4th 1 · California Court of Appeal · May 22, 2015

A stepfather is clearly not legally the same as a father. … Burt is clearly distinguishable.

Piombo v. Board of Retirement

214 Cal. App. 3d 329 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 27, 1989

Despite all of respondent’s efforts, there is nothing in any of the applicable statutes to support his assertion that membership in a retirement, system (in this instance, PERS) qualifies as “employment.” … [T]he Court concludes that had the legislature intended such language it clearly could have so stated. It did not do so.”

People v. Stennett

51 Cal. App. 370 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 14, 1921

On the following morning, March 6th, between the hours of 8 and 9 o'clock, it was discovered by one of the Kings (the evidence does not show clearly which of the two brothers) that the tires above described had been removed … on circumstantial evidence, there must be produced in the minds of the jury the same degree of certainty as to the defendant's guilt as is required where direct evidence is relied upon. [11] Instruction number 6 very clearly

Advanced Delivery Service, Inc. v. Gates

183 Cal. App. 3d 967 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 28, 1986

Before such a legislative intent can be assumed the statute must clearly compel it . . . .” (Id., at p. 221.) … Undesirables could easily establish messenger services and become involved in wagering, undermining the licensing requirements of the Act.

People v. Puerto

248 Cal. App. 4th 325 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 21, 2016

Such a situation is not present in this case. 5 There is no dispute Rockwood qualified as a criminal street gang. … “‘[O]fficial government records clearly describing a prior conviction presumptively establish that the conviction in fact occurred, assuming those records meet the threshold requirements of admissibility. (See Evid.