Case law

People v. Alhimidi CA4/1

California Court of Appeal · Nov 24, 2015

The video did not clearly show the color or make of the vehicle, but an expert opined that the image likely was Kassim's van based on later tests and evaluation. … However, these videos were blurry and did not clearly show this was Kassim's vehicle.

Abed v. Western Dental Services, Inc.

California Court of Appeal · May 23, 2018

Employers who lie about the existence of 14 open positions are not immune from liability under the FEHA simply because they are effective in keeping protected persons from … Although Strickling was not responsible for making the ultimate decision to hire an applicant, she was clearly involved in the general process by which externs obtained permanent positions: she supervised externs and evaluated

People v. Melhado

60 Cal. App. 4th 1529 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 27, 1998

The evidence regarding the 9 a.m. event established that it, too, could have qualified as a violation of section 422, so that we cannot say beyond a reasonable doubt that each juror agreed on the particular criminal act that … Such a result clearly undermines the purpose of the statute. We believe Penal Code section 422 was aimed precisely at the kind of behavior in which *1538 Brooks engaged here. If not this, then what?”

Reveles v. Toyota by the Bay

57 Cal. App. 4th 1139 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 22, 1997

Even an “as is” sale disclaimer “does not necessarily confer on the seller a general immunity from liability for fraud. … trial judge is the best judge of the value of professional services rendered in his court, and while his judgment is of course subject to review, it will not be disturbed unless the appellate court is convinced that it is clearly

Health Net of California, Inc. v. Department of Health Services

6 Cal. Rptr. 3d 235 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 12, 2003

An unqualified prohibition against the recovery of damages in the context of a commercial transaction certainly qualifies as such an exemption. … We note that we have not been asked to determine whether DHS is immune from liability for damages on any other ground and therefore do not address any such issue.

Richard Boyd Industries, Inc. v. State Board of Equalization

107 Cal. Rptr. 2d 520 · California Court of Appeal · May 30, 2001

Oliver merely established that reasonable minds might have reached a different result .... … Oliver, it is unclear in what way Oliver was qualified to render expert legal opinions on the definition of words in a regulation.

City of Rocklin v. Legacy Family Adventures etc.

California Court of Appeal · Dec 21, 2022

The City maintained defendants’ special motion to strike was frivolous because the commercial speech exemption clearly applied. … Certainly, published authority confirming a matter is devoid of merit could establish frivolousness.

Sutter Health Uninsured Pricing Cases

171 Cal. App. 4th 495 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 27, 2009

Then, the deponent gave an estimated answer and qualified it, stating he could clarify it later. … Throughout his briefs Stowers assumes that establishing liability was simple.

Anderson v. Department of Real Estate

93 Cal. App. 3d 696 · California Court of Appeal · May 11, 1979

Clearly the good character requirements for licensure of real estate brokers and salesmen bear that rational relationship. … One who has met the standard of learning to qualify is necessarily pulled toward putting the learning to use.

Johnson v. San Diego Unified Port Dist. CA4/1

California Court of Appeal · Jan 6, 2014

5  In opposition, plaintiffs argued that Krueper's opinions were relevant and the statutory immunities cited by the Port are affirmative defenses to be established at trial and are not proper grounds for excluding … With respect to the alleged failure to provide other types of official traffic signs, section 830.8 applies and provides a qualified immunity. 14  The court found section

Lushbaugh v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.

113 Cal. Rptr. 2d 700 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 20, 2001

The order gives two bases: (1) that “the Glendale Store’s frontage area does not qualify as a quasi-public forum and therefore the requirements of Prunevard and its progeny do not apply” and (2) that “even though Home Depot … with any duty it may have had to provide public access by *1167 enforcing its reasonable time, place, and manner rules, we need not consider whether a warehouse-type retail store’s characteristics do or do not render it immune

Schultz v. Harney

27 Cal. App. 4th 1611 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 1, 1994

It is established beyond all reasonable dispute that a final judgment or order, even if erroneous or clearly contrary to a statute, is res judicata if the court had jurisdiction in the fundamental sense, that is, jurisdiction … Although it has since been judicially established that MICRA’s attorney fee limitations cannot be waived (Fineberg v.

Pettus v. Cole

49 Cal. App. 4th 402 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 12, 1996

Quasi-judicial immunity has been made available for a mediator in a child custody dispute (Susan A. v. … Unger’s written reports clearly demonstrates the private nature of the information transmitted to Du Pont.

Dorsic v. Kurtin

19 Cal. App. 3d 226 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 11, 1971

The rule is clearly established that before the jury may be properly instructed on assumption of risk, there must be evidence that the plaintiff knew of danger and had actual knowledge of the specific danger involved. … In each case the fact of insurance was clearly brought to the attention of the jury.

Stufkosky v. Department of Transportation CA2/6

California Court of Appeal · Oct 30, 2023

“Design immunity is . . . often raised on a motion for summary judgment or nonsuit, [thereby] enabling the trial court to find the defense established as a matter of law.” (Grenier, supra, 57 Cal.App.4th at 939-940.) … Such evidence is not necessary because the complaint clearly alleges the required causal connection. (See Alvis v.

Curry v. SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN BERNARDINO CTY.

20 Cal. App. 4th 180 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 18, 1993

However, it did establish a procedure and a rule by which multiple tortfeasors could establish the parties’ relative percentages of fault, and by which a judgment debtor who paid more than his share could recover from joint … First, the modem trend of the law clearly favors the equitable sharing of losses among tortfeasors.

English v. City of Long Beach

114 Cal. App. 2d 311 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 21, 1952

While counsel for respondents undertake to question the propriety of the filing of this document, it was clearly authorized (Scott v. … This action was clearly erroneous.

Herald v. Glendale Lodge No. 1289

46 Cal. App. 325 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 25, 1920

It clearly is not a business concern, in any mercantile or commercial sense. … W. 727 ], which is clearly in point.

Schleif v. Grigsby

88 Cal. App. 174 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 31, 1927

negligence per se the rule that if one may be charged with a knowledge, past or present, of a danger, he is precluded from recovery for injuries sustained therefrom and let the rule rest there for all cases would be to establish … In any event the evidence shows clearly that he had completed his employment at the Fowle ranch and was moving out.

Gerawan Farming, Inc. v. Agricultural Labor Relations Bd.

California Court of Appeal · Sep 24, 2019

The trial court concluded the jurisdictional bar of section 1164.9 was dispositive of the matter and the 42 U.S.C. section 1983 claim failed because the individual defendants were immune. … Since MMC proceedings are not ordinary civil trials, to qualify for a presumption of access, Garcia must first establish through application of the “experience and logic” test that a right of access attaches to on-the-record