Case law

People v. Brown

79 Cal. App. 2d 383 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 29, 1947

In People v. … In People v.

Brown v. White

43 Cal. App. 363 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 25, 1919

Brown. [1] In Vallejo High School District of Solano County v. White, supra, it was held that Nielsen’s employment as principal of said high school ended June 30, 1919. … This being so, the board had authority to employ someone to take his place.

Giardino v. Brown

120 Cal. Rptr. 2d 77 · California Court of Appeal · May 24, 2002

The court in Arnold v. … Harrold v.

Enomoto v. Brown

117 Cal. App. 3d 408 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 26, 1981

XX, § 16 [repealed Nov. 7, 1972]; and see People v. Hill (1857) 7 Cal. 97, 102 ; Patton v. Board of Health etc. (1899) 127 Cal. 388, 392 [ 59 P. 702 ]; Sponogle v. Curnow (1902) 136 Cal. 580, 582 [ 69 P. 255 ].) … (Owen v. City of Independence (1980) 445 U.S. 622 , 633-634 fn. 13 [ 63 L.Ed.2d 673, 682-683 , 100 S.Ct. 1398 ]; Board of Regents v.

Anrecht v. Brown

98 Cal. App. 2d 524 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 24, 1950

In State v. Watson the testator’s wish was: “it is my desire that this should be carried into effect by my brother-in-law, Samuel Mayrant.” In both cases the petitions of the parties named were denied. … Brown, Public Administrator of Los Angeles County, be and the same are denied; that letters of administration with will annexed be issued to Drury D.

People v. Brown

125 Cal. App. 2d 83 · California Court of Appeal · May 7, 1954

In People v. … In People v.

People v. Brown

28 Cal. App. 4th 591 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 21, 1994

(People v. Harrison, supra, 48 Cal.3d at p. *602 329 .) As the California Supreme Court observed in People v. … Appellant’s citation to People v.

Tuman v. Brown

59 Cal. App. 2d 16 · California Court of Appeal · May 29, 1943

(Sanford v. Boring, 12 Cal. 539; Robinson v. Baker, 35 Cal.App. 318 [ 169 P. 694 ].) … (Revert v. Hesse, 184 Cal. 295 [ 193 P. 943 ].)

Brown v. Kiely

126 Cal. App. 2d 191 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 23, 1954

In case of such doubt it seems correct to instruct the jury on the law with respect to both possibilities (compare Reed v. Strok, 54 Cal.App.2d 183, 190 [ 128 P.2d 829 ]; Carney v. … Brown was entitled to the right of way.” The last sentence quoted evidently implies that there was in this respect a question of fact for the jury to decide.

Green v. Brown

115 Cal. App. 2d 317 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 13, 1953

Brown. Green appealed from an earlier judgment, which was reversed by the Supreme Court without qualification. (Green v. Brown, 37 Cal.2d 391 [ 232 P.2d 487 ].) … Brown, the latter, a daughter of Mrs. Green. The Browns claim the right to occupy the property as their home under an oral agreement with Mr. and Mrs. Green and that under another oral agreement with Mr.

People v. Brown

56 Cal. Rptr. 3d 255 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 21, 2007

56 Cal.Rptr.3d 255 (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 911 The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Desmond BROWN, Defendant and Appellant. No. D047721. Court of Appeal of California, Fourth District, Division One. … Brown was sentenced to a term of 25 years to life plus 12 years.

People v. Brown

78 Cal. App. 2d 773 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 26, 1947

(People v. Cohen, 62 Cal.App. 521 [ 217 P. 78 ]; People v. Perfetti, 88 Cal.App609 [ 264 P. 318]; People v. Lamanuzzi, 77 Cal.App. 301 [ 246 P. 557 ].) … Brown in that regard? A. I don’t remember the exact words or anything, but it was the second time he had seen me up there. I went up there with a girl, her and myself. Q.

Brown v. Barnett

111 Cal. App. 456 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 30, 1931

(Bull v. Coe, 77 Cal. 54 [ 11 Am. St. Rep. 235 , 18 Pac. 808, 810 ]; Jepsen v. Beck, 78 Cal. 540 [ 21 Pac. 184 ].) See, also, 21 A. L. R., p. 34 et seq.; 58 A. L. R., p. 623 et seq. … (Ross v. Cornell, 45 Cal. 133 .) The judgment is reversed. Houser, J., and York, J., concurred.

People v. Brown

182 Cal. App. 2d 533 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 7, 1960

that a malicious and guilty intent is always presumed from the deliberate commission of any unlawful act in a case where the unlawfulness of the act, as in this case, depends on the specific intent was condemned in People v.

Earnest v. Brown

43 Cal. App. 2d 551 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 19, 1941

Sugarman v. Brown

California Court of Appeal · Dec 27, 2021

(Sugarman v. Benett (Dec. 27, 2021, B307753).) In the published portion of our opinion, we affirm the Brown order granting defendant Brown’s motion in part. … (Soukup v. Law Offices of Herbert Hafif (2006) 39 Cal.4th 260, 269, fn. 3.) 1. Mr. Brown’s Anti-SLAPP Motion Plaintiff alleged two causes of action against Mr. Brown based on the same facts.

Brown v. Waldo

12 Cal. App. 2d 185 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 28, 1936

In the case of Brown v. Fordon, 5 Cal. (2d) 226 [ 54 Pac. (2d) 712 ], it was held that the code section mentioned cannot apply retroactively to instruments executed before its effective date.

People v. Brown

113 Cal. App. 492 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 17, 1931

In Torson v. Fleming, 91 Cal. … (People v. Jordan, 172 Cal. 391 [ 156 Pac. 451 ]; Hunt v. Manning, 24 Cal. App. 44 [ 140 Pac. 39 ].)”

People v. Brown

214 Cal. App. 2d 128 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 15, 1963

At the trial it was stipulated by all counsel that there would be received in evidence a certificate from the State of California Department of Corrections dated March 13, 1962, which stated that James Edward Brown was received … (See People v. Thompson, 158 Cal.App.2d 320 [ 322 P.2d 489 ].)

People v. Brown

28 Cal. App. 261 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 17, 1915

“I instruct you that a witness who deliberately testifies falsely in one part of his testimony is to be distrusted in other parts thereof”; but a similar instruction was held not to be substantially erroneous in People v.