Case law

People v. Davey

34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 811 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 17, 2005

.) *390 Under established case law, there are two limitations on the scope of section 654’s ban on multiple punishment. … Nonetheless, his crime is not statutorily defined as involving violence to the person, and the case law clearly limits the applicability of the multiple-victim exception to crimes that are so defined. B.

Rees v. Department of Real Estate

76 Cal. App. 3d 286 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 29, 1977

(c)), the record clearly demonstrates that the trial court “exercised its independent judgment on the evidence” in reaching its decision. … Since the *295 business activities of appellant required a valid real estate license, his claim of immunity in having failed to be so licensed is hardly persuasive.

Richard v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.

California Court of Appeal · Oct 24, 2024

A person is qualified to testify as an expert “if he has special knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education sufficient to qualify him as an expert on the subject to which his testimony relates.” (§ 720, subd. … The goal of trial court gatekeeping is simply to exclude ‘clearly invalid and unreliable’ expert opinion. [Citation.]

P. ex rel. Bonta v. Greenpower Motor Co., Inc.

California Court of Appeal · Jul 28, 2025

A single HVIP voucher can reimburse up to $100,000 per qualifying electric vehicle. … to better identify whether each HVIP-qualifying electric vehicle was physically delivered and whether each HVIP-qualifying electric vehicle was operated, and stayed in operation, in the State of California for at least three

People v. Bond

13 Cal. App. 175 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 7, 1910

It is difficult to understand how the instruction could have more positively “affirmed” the duty of the people to establish one of these conditions to justify conviction. … The witness showed he was qualified by testifying that he had known the deceased for something like twenty-five years.

People v. Waqa

California Court of Appeal · Jun 14, 2023

More generally, the risk of harm beyond that inherent in the rape was not clearly increased in the large stall compared to the small stall. … Nor did the movement to the large stall clearly enhance Waqa’s ability to “gain control over [Doe] and ensure[] her compliance.”

Consolidated Rock Products Co. v. State of California

57 Cal. App. 2d 959 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 6, 1943

The territory of Southern California is divided by the rock and gravel companies into zones, and transportation charges to the various zones are established. … The usé of the qualifying adverb “indirectly” gives the definition a very sweeping character, and were the question a completely novel one we would have no hesitation in holding that in such transaction the merchant was transporting

Gordon v. Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP

California Court of Appeal · Feb 23, 2023

More specifically, Trust B would be a “bypass trust” containing stocks and other securities, while Trust C would be a qualified terminable interest property trust (or QTIP trust) designed to qualify for the unlimited federal … A “‘“key element”’” of plaintiffs’ sole cause of action for malpractice is “‘“the establishment of a duty by the [lawyer] to the claimant.”’” (Moore v.

Western Municipal Water District v. Superior Court

187 Cal. App. 3d 1104 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 11, 1986

It is likewise true that the administrative interpretation of a statute will be accorded great respect by the courts and will be followed if not clearly erroneous. [Citations.] … Indeed, it is difficult to imagine a large-scale public works project, such as an extensive deforestation project or a new freeway, which could not qualify for emergency exemption from an EIR on the grounds that it might

County National Bank & Trust Co. v. Sheppard

136 Cal. App. 2d 205 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 14, 1955

Neither Powers nor Kaufmann were qualified to provide such data, and both acknowledged their personal unfamiliarity with the intrinsic worth of the company’s properties. … The dominant purposes of the testator, when he formulated the trust, are clearly and unequivocally expressed.

Benguet Consolidated Mining Co. v. Industrial Accident Commission

36 Cal. App. 2d 158 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 19, 1939

S., at p. 538 ), pointed out that, under the California decisions, it had been held that the “privileges and immunities clause of the Federal Constitution prevented giving any effect to the requirement that the employee be … He was clearly acting as the agent of petitioner, and petitioner was clearly doing a material portion of its business in this state.

Alvez v. Toprahanian

39 Cal. App. 2d 126 · California Court of Appeal · May 16, 1940

Gianola was, by an order duly given, made and entered on a certain date, appointed guardian of the estates of these minors, giving their names, and that ever since said date he has been and now is, the duly appointed, qualified … In a concurring opinion in the case just cited, it was pointed out that the rule that a trustee cannot deal with his beneficiary was too broadly stated in the main opinion in that recognition was not given to established

City of San Marcos v. California Highway Commission

60 Cal. App. 3d 383 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 22, 1976

exercise of discretion in a particular manner, the above cases abundantly show that mandamus will lie to correct abuses of discretion, and will lie to force a particular action by the inferior tribunal or officer, when the law clearly … Hoppin, supra, was charged with making a factual determination as to whether the requirements established by the Legislature as a condition precedent to the establishment of a further right created by statute had been established

People v. Ledesma

204 Cal. App. 3d 682 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 15, 1988

Nor was there any impropriety in the trial court’s permitting the prosecution to introduce testimony to establish the unavailability of a witness (People v. … Lynn (1984) 159 Cal.App.3d 715, 737 [ 206 Cal.Rptr. 181 ]); instructions on excusable homicide clearly were unwarranted in view of the evidence (Barber v.

San Diego County Health & Human Services Agency v. Kristine W.

114 Cal. Rptr. 2d 369 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 12, 2001

as a patient and the therapy provider qualified as a psychotherapist, with the communications between the two constituting confidential communications, and the privilege applied. … given Kristine’s age and the circumstances of this case, there is no practical possibility that she will be reunified with Father. 7 We also recognize she “has at stake a substantial privacy interest” in the therapy she clearly

Hearn v. PG&E

California Court of Appeal · Jan 28, 2025

investigation “revealed unclear feedback loops between management and non-management employees regarding acceptable/unacceptable practices or policies about going home during a work or overtime shift” and recommended PG&E clearly … Hearn has not established, and does not contend, that he is entitled as a matter of law to prevail on his retaliation claim.

Estate of Rollins

163 Cal. App. 2d 225 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 28, 1958

Respondents here have therefore taken to an extent clearly contrary to the intent of the testatrix. … The residuary clause establishes a valid charitable trust. (Rest., Trusts, § 397, comment (f).) Decree reversed. Dooling, J., concurred.

People v. Kuykendall

134 Cal. App. 2d 642 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 29, 1955

The expert witness was a qualified physician, licensed to practice in California. … Clearly the statement was supported by the evidence.

Hearn v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.

California Court of Appeal · Jan 24, 2025

investigation “revealed unclear feedback loops between management and non-management employees regarding acceptable/unacceptable practices or policies about going home during a work or overtime shift” and recommended PG&E clearly … Hearn has not established, and does not contend, that he is entitled as a matter of law to prevail on his retaliation claim.

Roman Catholic Bishop v. Superior Court

28 Cal. Rptr. 3d 355 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 28, 2005

Because she did not qualify for equitable relief and because no other relief was then available, the trial court dismissed her action. … At issue in Myers was the immunity of tobacco companies from certain products liability suits and the statutory repeal of that immunity.