Case law

People v. Emanuel

87 Cal. App. 3d 205 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 11, 1978

The doctrine of inevitable discovery thus clearly applies. (People v. Superior Court (Punch) (1978) 80 Cal.App.3d 665, 673 [ 145 Cal.Rptr. 795 ].) … The doctrine was developed to prevent unjustly granting criminals immunity from prosecution.’

Chase Chemical Co. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.

159 Cal. App. 3d 229 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 17, 1984

Clearly, then, it cannot sue the employer’s insurance carrier for the same conduct.” … It is a well established principle of jurisprudence, that when the reason for a rule does not apply, the rule itself should not apply.

Sandell v. Taylor-Listug, Inc.

188 Cal. App. 4th 297 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 7, 2010

(k)(l)(B), italics added.) 5 “[A] qualifying disease or condition ‘limits a major life activity if it makes the achievement’ of the activity ‘difficult.’ [Citation.]” (Colmenares v. … At a minimum, evidence that an individual requires a cane in order to walk is clearly sufficient to establish that a person is physically disabled under California law. *312 Taylor-Listug cites McDonald v.

California Wholesale Material Supply, Inc. v. Norm Wilson & Sons, Inc.

117 Cal. Rptr. 2d 390 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 28, 2002

The facts herein clearly establish that CalPly sued Wilson to collect on the subcontract after having obtained a security interest/ assignment from Johnwall. … Given the purpose of establishing mutuality of remedy, and to prevent one-sided attorney fee provisions, Reynolds Metals Co. v.

People v. M.V.

225 Cal. App. 4th 1495 · California Court of Appeal · May 5, 2014

As a general rule, a child who qualifies as both a dependent and a ward of the juvenile court cannot be both. (§ 241.1, subd. … Soriano (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 781, 783 [plea to filing a forged instrument may be challenged when death certificate at issue did not qualify as an instrument].)

Davallou v. County of Santa Clara CA6

California Court of Appeal · May 23, 2025

The general immunity afforded by section 815 is significantly qualified by section 814. … Most pertinently here, section 845 provides immunity against claims concerning the establishment of police departments and provision of police protection services: “Neither a public entity nor a public employee is liable

Surabian v. Lorenz

229 Cal. App. 2d 462 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 31, 1964

One witness, perhaps the best qualified of all who testified on the subject, is a practicing dentist and a member of the teaching staff of the University of California in the Department of Oral Surgery, as well as a guest … We are not embarrassed by Gerhardt , however, since the facts of that ease are clearly distinguishable from the case at bench.

Roman v. Bre Properties, Inc.

237 Cal. App. 4th 1040 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 17, 2015

Roman suffered from a qualifying disability is dispositive of all those claims. Similarly, because Ms. … for independently established state law remedies”].)

Hilltop Group, Inc. v. County of San Diego

California Court of Appeal · Feb 16, 2024

To balance its goals and guide future development, the GPU established land use categories and a corresponding land use map. … However, “ ‘ “[s]ubstantial evidence is not argument, speculation, unsubstantiated opinion or narrative, evidence that is clearly inaccurate or erroneous, or evidence of social or economic impacts that do not contribute to

Shay v. Roth

64 Cal. App. 314 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 31, 1923

Prior to the amendment the salary attached to the office of sheriff as established by the charter of the county was two thousand four hundred dollars per annum. … It seems clear that under present law a county is not clothed with immunity from constitutional obedience, whether it act by charter adoption or amendment thereto.

In Re Marriage of Bastian

94 Cal. App. 3d 483 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 27, 1979

James Bastían qualified for a pension under the Trust on July 1, 1975, and was receiving a monthly check for $302.28. … Applied to the facts here, the standards of International Shoe and its issue clearly establish the existence of personal jurisdiction over the Trust.

County of San Diego v. GUY C.

30 Cal. App. 4th 1325 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 14, 1994

The County reasons as follows: Under former section 4720.1, subdivision (a)(2), the Legislature clearly stated its intent that the rules established by the Judicial Council to set guidelines for child support should be adhered … The court thus found that these discretionary factors did not qualify as exceptional circumstances which justify departure from the guidelines as to mandatory mínimums. (Former §§ 4720, subd. (e), 4725.)

In Re Marriage of Biddle

52 Cal. App. 4th 396 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 29, 1997

Therefore in his view he has no property interest in the cause of action that would qualify it for division as community property. The former Mrs. … If these contingencies are satisfied, the plaintiff’s entitlement to a cash recovery is, to all intents and purposes, established.

Campos v. Employment Development Department

132 Cal. App. 3d 961 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 21, 1982

The employees who were working at the plants at the time walked out and picket lines were established. … Although “[t]he statute manifests a clear legislative intent that the State remain completely neutral during a labor dispute^] the statute just as clearly manifests an intent that unemployed workers need not be turned into

Brown v. Crandall

198 Cal. App. 4th 1 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 12, 2011

We affirm the judgment if the amended petition fails to plead, or the County negates, any essential element, or if the allegations “ ‘ “clearly disclose some defense or bar to recovery.” ’ ” (Holiday Matinee, at p. 1421, … To the extent the County relies on assets in Brown’s retirement account, the matters subject to judicial notice do not establish as a matter of law that applicants may not spend down assets to qualify under the County’s standards

People v. Henderson

225 Cal. App. 3d 1129 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 30, 1990

After the questionnaires are reviewed and the names of those disqualified, excused or deferred, are removed, the list becomes the qualified pool known as the qualified jury list. … Additionally, the prosecution evidence clearly showed the appellants’ flight across country, during which some of the stolen property was sold.

People v. Adames

54 Cal. App. 4th 198 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 14, 1997

In order to establish the court’s exercise of discretion violated his or her right of confrontation under the Sixth Amendment of the federal Constitution, the defendant must establish that “he [or she] was prohibited from … The Legislature’s intent clearly is to require AIDS testing of anyone who has committed “[l]ewd or lascivious acts with a child in violation of Section 288[.]”

Edwards v. Brockway

16 Cal. App. 626 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 21, 1911

It appears that at the time of the injury to plaintiff, defendant Brockway was the duly appointed, qualified and acting superintendent of streets of the city of San Diego; that he made and delivered a bond signed by himself … At the times in question the government of the city of San Diego was conducted under a freeholders’ charter which provided for the establishment of a board of public works consisting of three commissioners.

Smith v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board

45 Cal. App. 3d 162 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 7, 1975

The board adopted this position in its decision after reconsideration, stating in pertinent part: “In this case it has not been persuasively established that . . . … Affirming an award of death benefits to his widow under the workmen’s compensation law, the reviewing court stated: “We deem the statutory presumption [arising under section 3212] clearly applicable.

In re I.S. CA4/3

California Court of Appeal · Apr 1, 2021

Testimonial Immunity for I.S.’s Father I.S. next claims the juvenile court erred in denying his request to order the prosecutor to grant use immunity to I.S.’s father for his “clearly exculpatory and essential … clearly exculpatory].)