Case law

Rabinowitz v. Kandel

1 Cal. App. 3d 961 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 20, 1969

The burden of establishing the accord and satisfaction lies with the party asserting it. (Metro v. Dickerson, 131 Cal.App.2d 106 [ 280 P.2d 25 ].) … Clearly, if the parties had arrived at an accord on 6 November, that accord was never executed and therefore never metamorphosed into satisfaction.

RIVERSIDE SHERIFF'S v. County of Riverside

61 Cal. Rptr. 3d 295 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 21, 2007

Clearly, the Legislature intended to expressly authorize a civil penalty and actual damages, as well as attorney's fees for malicious violations of the statute." ( Lozada v. … Addressing the first condition, the County maintains RSA cannot qualify for fees under section 1021.5 because RSA did not secure "an important right affecting the public interest."

Bunch v. Coachella Valley Water District

214 Cal. App. 3d 203 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 22, 1989

while we recognized in Albers that strict inverse condemnation liability may not be appropriate in the case of flood control improvements, we emphasized in Holtz that such improvements should not be cloaked with the same immunity … A flood control facility which collects stream waters from two natural watercourses and moves them to yet a third clearly produces an intentional diversion of waters from the first two natural watercourses.

Stanislaus County Community Services Agency v. Anthony D.

102 Cal. App. 4th 560 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 27, 2002

Government Code section 1302 provides that “[e]very officer whose term has expired shall continue to discharge the duties of his office until his successor has qualified.” … This type of gap is simply not supportable under established public policy considerations. (See Hartford Acc. etc. Co. v.

Olden v. Hatchell

154 Cal. App. 3d 1032 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 25, 1984

commenced by affidavit, and such defendant may be designated in any pleading or proceeding by any name, and when his true name is discovered, the pleading or proceeding must be amended accordingly...." (3) It is a well established … Rptr. 421 , 484 P.2d 93 ] ["Unless the Legislature has clearly provided for [governmental] immunity, the important societal goal of compensating injured parties for damages caused by willful or negligent acts must prevail

Shehtanian v. Kenny

156 Cal. App. 2d 576 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 8, 1958

In any event, the rule is well established that failure to act within the standards fixed by the Vehicle Code is negligence per se (Satterlee v. Orange Glenn School Dist., 29 Cal.2d 581 [ 177 P.2d 279 ]). … Even if there were such evidence, appellants’ complaint is foreclosed by their failure to request instructions qualifying the rule correctly stated in the instructions given (Miller v.

People v. Poulsom

213 Cal. App. 4th 501 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 31, 2013

White looked at an aerial map and saw that Poulsom was clearly inside the Wild Animal Park. White told Poulsom to report immediately to the Escondido parole office and gave him directions. … It clearly is. A mental health professional cannot be expected to render opinions as to current status without fully evaluating background information.

Levin v. Ligon

45 Cal. Rptr. 3d 560 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 30, 2006

Levin never clearly objected on the basis of the documents’ authenticity and has therefore waived raising this claim on appeal. (Evid. … He clearly is seeking an unfair advantage in that he admitted, under English law, he had no interest in this property.

People v. Honig

48 Cal. App. 4th 289 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 7, 1996

Defendant’s interest was clearly substantial. … The trial court clearly did not err in excluding this evidence.

People v. Pierre R.

California Court of Appeal · Nov 18, 2019

his due process rights in establishing that the commitment offense involved force or violence. (§ 2962, subd. … fact . . . is allowed to fill in that gap of their own personal knowledge or guesswork or anything else when there is absolutely no evidence in the record to support it.” 4 appellant clearly

Gruschka v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board

169 Cal. App. 3d 789 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 26, 1985

Otherwise, virtually all human beings would qualify for virtually all benefits. … I cannot, however, join my colleagues in their test of “good cause” nor the clearly implied mandate to apply that test in a manner reversing the *795 factual determinations of the administrative law judge, the board, and

O'Grady v. Merchant Exchange Productions, Inc.

California Court of Appeal · Oct 31, 2019

It is clear from the tip pool decisions (see fn. 6, post), that an employer who establishes a gratuity pool cannot require, or allow, that any portion of it go to persons who qualify as the employer’s agent. (Jameson v. … Use of a barber or hairdresser would likely qualify, as would a spa or gym facilities.

Cornell v. Berkeley Tennis Club

California Court of Appeal · Dec 21, 2017

On the other hand, severe obesity, which has been defined as body weight more than 100% over the norm, is clearly an impairment.’ ” (Resources for Human Development, at p. 694, citing EEOC Compliance Manual § 902.2(c)(5). … Edwards recognized that “the ‘bare possibility’ that a judicial proceeding ‘might be instituted’ in the future ‘is not to be used as a cloak to provide immunity’ for fraud and other tortious conduct.”

Lavine v. Jessup

161 Cal. App. 2d 59 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 4, 1958

Prom this stems the long-established doctrine of immunity for actions involving an exercise of judgment and discretion. … Although factually different from the instant controversy, the fundamental principle is clearly applicable.

Brookside Investments, Ltd. v. City of El Monte

5 Cal. App. 5th 540 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 15, 2016

MTRAP mandated a 10 percent rental discount for qualified low-income seniors but limited its “rental assistance subsidy” to no more than 10 percent of the occupied spaces in a mobilehome park. … . (2010) 49 Cal.4th 277, 290-291 [“‘the presumption of constitutionality accorded to legislative acts is particularly appropriate when the Legislature has enacted a statute with the relevant constitutional prescriptions clearly

City of Bell v. Super. Ct.

California Court of Appeal · Oct 9, 2013

Clearly, it is not.‖ and replace with the following: duty to defend is dependent upon the scope of the duty to indemnify. … The language of the indemnity clause clearly applies to third-party civil actions, not criminal complaints and indictments.

DeMonbrun v. Sheet Metal Workers International Ass'n

140 Cal. App. 2d 546 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 6, 1956

Clearly, all of these matters involve the decision or order of the general president. … Whenever a local union or council or the officers or members thereof fail to establish and maintain, within their jurisdiction, wages and working conditions equivalent to those established and maintained within the jurisdiction

Bakersfield Elementary Teachers Ass'n v. Bakersfield City School District

52 Cal. Rptr. 3d 486 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 19, 2006

Thus, the District asserts: “Under the trial court’s construction [of the Code], a school district would be required to lay off fully qualified teachers and retain teachers [with more seniority] who are not fiilly qualified … If a school district hires a certificated person as a temporary employee, the written statement shall clearly indicate the temporary nature of the employment and the length of time for which the person is being employed.

People v. Turner

121 Cal. App. Supp. 2d 861 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 24, 1953

school authorities at all times, and that the interests of the persons conducting the same would compel the maintenance of the required standard of instruction by competent instructors for otherwise the school would fail to qualify … As stated earlier in this opinion, the state is entitled to establish a system whereby it can be known, by reasonable means, that the required teaching is being done."

People v. Cornejo

3 Cal. App. 5th 36 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 6, 2016

Additional Background Detective Jason Kirtlan interviewed Neal in the presence of Neal‘s attorney, who had secured an immunity agreement for Neal prior to the interview. … ‘s office, who agreed, and in this case gave him a letter of immunity.‖ During the prosecution‘s redirect examination, the prosecutor asked Detective Kirtlan: ―Is there anything other than what you‘ve already stated