Case law

Lusardi Construction Co. v. California Occupational Safety & Health Appeals Board

1 Cal. App. 4th 639 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 5, 1991

The Board recognized that safety orders are to be liberally construed to promote safety. (Carmona v. Division of Industrial Safety, supra, 13 Cal.3d at p. 313 .) … However, contrary common practice does not render the Board’s interpretation of a regulation clearly erroneous. (Bendix Forest Products Corp. v.

Los Angeles County Employees Ass'n v. County of Los Angeles

168 Cal. App. 3d 683 · California Court of Appeal · May 23, 1985

(Glendale City Employees’ Assn., Inc. v. … It is clear that under Government Code section 3505.1, 2 the fringe benefit MOU was tentative and not binding until it was approved by the board of supervisors. (Bagley v.

San Diego Tavern & Restaurant Ass'n v. Local Joint Executive Board

174 Cal. App. 2d 246 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 5, 1959

The Board may thereupon insert said provision in this contract.” … (Merlino v. Fresno Macaroni Mfg. Co., 74 Cal.App.2d 120, 126 [3] [ 168 P.2d 182 ]; Stenzor v. Leon, 130 Cal.App.2d 729, 735 [ 279 P.2d 802 ].)

County of Los Angeles v. Tax Appeals Board No. 2

267 Cal. App. 2d 830 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 3, 1968

City of Santa Barbara, 214 Cal.App.2d 626, 630-631 [ 29 Cal.Rptr. 558 ]; also Allen v. Humboldt County Board of Supervisors, 220 Cal.App.2d 877, 882 [ 34 Cal.Rptr. 232 ]; People v. … [Citations.] ” (Koehn v. State Board of Equalization, 50 Cal.2d 432, 435 [ 326 P.2d 502 ].)

Pacific Gas and Electric Co. v. State Board of Equalization

134 Cal. App. 2d 149 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 27, 1955

In Lyydikainen v. Industrial Acc. … (Bank of America v. Superior Court, 115 Cal.App. 454, 457 [ 1 P.2d 1081 ].)

301 Ocean Avenue Corp. v. Santa Monica Rent Control Board

228 Cal. App. 3d 1548 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 6, 1991

The Board has elevated the right to parking beyond that which is necessary to ensure the availability of affordable housing. Although the Board refers by way of example to Nash v. … In Sterling v.

Youngstown Steel Products Co. v. State Board of Equalization

148 Cal. App. 2d 205 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 1, 1957

Plaintiff’s claim for refund was likewise denied by the Board. … (Martin v. California Mut. B. & L. Assn., 18 Cal.2d 478, 484 [ 116 P.2d 71 ]; Standard Oil Co. v. Johnson, 24 Cal.2d 40, 48 [ 147 P.2d 577 ].)

Redwood Empire Publishing Co. v. State Board of Equalization

207 Cal. App. 3d 1334 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 16, 1989

Comm’n (1980) 447 U.S. 530, 538 [ 65 L.Ed.2d 319, 328 , 100 S.Ct. 2326 ]; Carey v. Brown (1980) 447 U.S. 455, 462 [ 65 L.Ed.2d 263, 270-271 , 100 S.Ct. 2286 ].) … Pattern Co. v.

Haniff v. Superior Court of Santa Clara County

9 Cal. App. 5th 191 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 1, 2017

He relied on the decision in Browne v. … and procedures adopted by the appeals board.

Troy Gold Industries, Ltd. v. Occupational Safety & Health Appeals Board

187 Cal. App. 3d 379 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 25, 1986

(Castaneda v. Holcomb (1981) 114 Cal.App.3d 939, 942 [ 170 Cal.Rptr. 875 ]; accord, Shippen v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1984) 161 Cal.App.3d 1119, 1124 [ 208 Cal.Rptr. 13 ]; Soper-Wheeler Co. v. … Assn. of Fire Fighters v. City of San Leandro (1986) 181 Cal.App.3d 179, 183 [ 226 Cal.Rptr. 238 ]; Shoban v.

Helzer v. North San Diego County Transit Development Board

112 Cal. App. 3d 708 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 26, 1980

Opinion BROWN (Gerald), P. J. Marvin Helzer and Merle Price appeal an order sustaining the North San Diego County Transit Development Board’s demurrer to their complaint without leave to amend. … (Wilson v. San Francisco Redevelopment Agency (1977) 19 Cal.3d 555, 560 [ 138 Cal.Rptr. 720 , 564 P.2d 872 ].) Here the board concedes it did not comply with section 53051.

North San Diego County Transit Development Board v. Vial

117 Cal. App. 3d 27 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 18, 1981

(N.L.R.B v. … Vincent Hospital v. N.L.R.B. (10th Cir. 1980) 621 F.2d 1054 . Forty Fourth Annual Report of the National Labor Relations Board. Assigned by the Chairperson of the Judicial Council.

West Coast Home Improvement Co. v. Contractors' State License Board

68 Cal. App. 2d 1 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 9, 1945

rules of evidence and procedure” (Dare v. … Board of Medical Examiners, supra, or Russell v.

Pennel v. Pond Union School District

29 Cal. App. 3d 832 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 4, 1973

{Conti v. Board of Civil Service Commissioners, 1 Cal.3d 351, 356-362 [ 82 Cal.Rptr. 337 , 461 P.2d 617 ]; Brown v. State Personnel Board, 43 Cal.App.2d 70, 79 [ 110 P.2d 497 ].) … {Brown v. State Personnel Board, supra, 43 Cal.App.2d 70, 79 , cited with approval in Conti v. Board of Civil Service Commissioners, supra, 1 Cal.3d 351, 359-360 .)

Meyer v. Brown CA4/1

California Court of Appeal · Oct 14, 2015

(Faton v. … Co. v.

People Ex Rel. Air Resources Board v. Superior Court

125 Cal. App. 3d 10 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 29, 1981

C-246284, entitled Western Oil and Gas Association et al. v. … (People v. Hickman (1928) 204 Cal. 470, 480 [ 268 P. 909 ]; also see Stern v. Stern (1948) 83 Cal.App.2d 608 [ 189 P.2d 536 ].) The Supreme Court again dealt with this matter in Donovan v.

Board of Administration, Public Employees' Retirement System v. Superior Court

50 Cal. App. 3d 314 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 31, 1975

Rozsa v. City of Santa Monica,” No. 33189 and “City of Santa Monica v. Board of Administration of Public Employees’ Retirement System,” No. … This presumption applies to the decision of an administrative board. (Cooper v. State Board of Public Health, 102 Cal.App.2d 926, 931 [ 229 P.2d 27 ].) Although this presumption is disputable (Le Strange v.

Delpit v. United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corp.

115 Cal. App. 85 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 18, 1931

United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corp., 19 Fed. (2d) 60) : “The judgment is reversed, for want of jurisdiction in the court below, and the case is remanded to that court, with directions to remand the case to … Co. v. Towboat Co., 59 S. C. 549 [ 38 S. E. 156 ]; Stockley v. Cissna, 119 Tenn. 135 [ 104 S. W. 792 ]; Pioneer Sav. etc. Co. v. Peck, 20 Tex. Civ. App. 111 [ 49 S. W. 160 ]; Michigan Stove Co. v.

Liang v. San Francisco Residential Rent Stabilization & Arbitration Board

21 Cal. Rptr. 3d 715 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 17, 2004

The Board qualifies as “a local agency . . . or . . . board” under section 1094.6. (E.g., El Dorado Palm Springs, Ltd. v. Rent Review Com. (1991) 230 Cal.App.3d 335 [ 281 Cal.Rptr. 327 ].) … However, the notice of the Board’s decision was attached to Liang’s amended petition. The amended petition was to be read as including the notice. (E.g., City of Pomona v.

Bethlehem Pacific Coast Steel Corp. v. Franchise Tax Board

203 Cal. App. 2d 458 · California Court of Appeal · May 10, 1962

(Select Base Materials, Inc. v. Board of Equalization, 51 Cal.2d 640 [ 335 P.2d 672 ]; County of Alameda v. Kuchel, 32 Cal.2d 193 [ 195 P.2d 17 ] ; Warner v. Kenny, 27 Cal.2d 627 [ 165 P.2d 889 ].) … (Wall v. Board of Directors, 145 Cal. 468, 473 [ 78 P. 951 ].)