Case law

Linney v. Turpen

42 Cal. App. 4th 763 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 7, 1996

Clearly the most significant case applying the rule articulated in Williams is Andrews . … An allegation at the appellate level of bias could not prevail. “ ‘Bias and prejudice are not implied and must be clearly established.

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.

Steel v. Thompson

59 Cal. App. 191 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 27, 1922

It is clearly stated in Baker v. Eilers Music Co., 26 Cal. … It is also the established rule that whether in any given case there has been such surrender is a question of *193 fact to be determined in the first instance by the trial court. (Triest & Co. v.

People v. Martinez

132 Cal. App. 3d 119 · California Court of Appeal · May 24, 1982

Under either substantive standard, however, Heath’s actions in this case qualify for accomplice status. … Obviously if the sentence were consecutive, it is clearly distinguishable from the case before us.

Pasadena Unified School District v. Pasadena Federation of Teachers

72 Cal. App. 3d 100 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 28, 1977

The complaint clearly states that the teachers were employed as certificated employees of the school system. In Fry v. … The rule as stated in the Restatement is clearly the law of California. (Loeb v.

People v. Edwards CA1/2

California Court of Appeal · Feb 27, 2024

[is] available to testify; [3] the proffered testimony [is] clearly exculpatory; [4] the testimony [is] essential; and [5] there [are] no strong governmental interests which countervail against a grant of immunity.” ’ ” … Richardson’s statements did not clearly exculpate Masters.” (Ibid.)

County of Sutter v. Board of Administration

215 Cal. App. 3d 1288 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 21, 1989

They prepare complaints and petitions for civil actions to establish and enforce child support obligations. They arrange blood tests and necessary transportation. … They assist in *1292 trial preparation of civil actions to establish and enforce child support obligations. They serve papers in connection with such litigation.

People v. Superior Court

242 Cal. App. 4th 692 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 24, 2015

Prunty (2015) 62 Cal.4th 59, 71, and the guidelines we follow are well-established. … A defendant pleads guilty or no contest to a qualifying misdemeanor charge. (§ 1001.94, subd. (b).)

People v. Hayes

16 Cal. App. 3d 662 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 14, 1971

The records would clearly have been admissible under Evidence Code section 1271, even had the missing “challenge” been made. 5. … The court was. under no duty on its own motion to add {hereto the now suggested “qualifying instructions.”

Charnay v. Cobert

51 Cal. Rptr. 3d 471 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 28, 2006

his fiduciary duty by fraudulently billing Chamay for services not performed at all or by using inflated rates for services performed by others, Chamay’s failure to comply with the contractual notice provision does not immunize … Under California law parties may agree to a provision shortening the statute of limitations, “qualified, however, by the requirement that the period fixed is not in itself unreasonable or is not so unreasonable as to show

Panico v. Truck Insurance Exchange

109 Cal. Rptr. 2d 638 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 25, 2001

The answer was no, though the court added that “imminent” collapse would qualify. (Id. at pp. 406, 408.) … Of course, in cases of a “mini-trial” in front of a jury there is no problem: There has clearly been a resolution of the facts by a trier of fact.

People v. Superior Court (J.C. Penney Corp., Inc.)

California Court of Appeal · May 6, 2019

Similarly, section 17502 establishes an immunity 12 from liability for entities that publish “an advertisement in good faith[] … 17501 ‘clearly proscribes’ nothing.”

De Freitas v. De Freitas

133 Cal. App. 2d 769 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 22, 1955

“An abuse of discretion must be clearly established before the reviewing court will interfere with an award of custody. (Wolfe v. Wolfe, 30 Cal.2d 1, 5 [ 180 P.2d 345 ]; Munson v. … The qualifying clause, “but other things being equal,” still leaves a large measure of discretion with the trial court.

People v. Barnes

California Court of Appeal · Dec 18, 2024

The court clearly took the latter approach. … Currently charged offenses no longer qualify (id., subd.

In Re Marriage of Hargrave

163 Cal. App. 3d 346 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 2, 1985

Although the referee tended to agree with husband rather than wife in deciding contested issues, it clearly was within his discretion to do so. … Even though husband’s opinion of the value of the property was $100,000 higher than that testified to by a qualified real estate appraiser, the law is that the owner of property is qualified to give his opinion of its value

VICTORIA S. v. Superior Court

13 Cal. Rptr. 3d 237 · California Court of Appeal · May 12, 2004

The report noted the aunt understood she could not qualify for KinGap (aid for legal guardians) until Kayla had been placed with her for one year. … Assuming, as Victoria contends, the evidence clearly establishes Kayla is not suitable for adoption and guardianship is not an available option, then we can only presume that long-term foster care would be the ultimate disposition

People v. Pollack

105 Cal. App. 2d 581 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 24, 1951

One of the arresting officers qualified as an expert on bookmaking activities in Los Angeles county, and described such bookmaking activities as follows: “The bookmaker has numerous agents working for him. … We are convinced that the term ‘bookmaking’ here under consideration and as used in the statute must be held -to clearly mean the making of a betting book.

Los Angeles County Department of Children's Services v. Mary P.

216 Cal. App. 3d 156 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 30, 1989

In addition thereto the Treaty of Ghent, (Exhibit B, same brief) and the Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation (Exhibit A, same brief) clearly grants to the Mic Mac Tribe of Canada the same status as the Indian Tribes … The trial court’s findings do not include a finding that Mary established domicile on a reservation.

Mobilepark West Homeowners Ass'n v. Escondido Mobilepark West

35 Cal. App. 4th 32 · California Court of Appeal · May 24, 1995

That initiative measure established a rent control board and set forth its duties to register rental units, establish and adjust rent levels, and issue permits for removal of controlled units. … Second, Civil Code section 798.17, subdivision (a) already exempts qualifying leases from all local rent control regulations.

Eltinge & Graziadio Development Co. v. Childs

49 Cal. App. 3d 294 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 23, 1975

The court made its determination based upon the four corners of the lease without any qualifying testimony. … Absent a provision indicating some other form *300 of valuation Bullock’s clearly indicates, and has for some 15 years, that the “value” means “market value.” The judgment is affirmed.