Case law

Golden v. Conway

55 Cal. App. 3d 948 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 1, 1976

.) *956 With these precepts in mind we can address the facts and principles on which the tenant would establish the landlord’s liability for negligence. … If there is to be any immunity for the negligence of the contractor it must depend on superseded immunities found in the law of landlord and tenant, which, as we have seen, were repudiated in Brennan v.

Mcveigh v. Recology San Francisco

213 Cal. App. 4th 443 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 31, 2013

McVeigh clearly had a reasonable basis for suspecting tag inflation fraud because Recology employees had been caught doing it. … Board of Trustees, supra, 105 Cal.App.4th at p. 1300, fn. 1 ), and “clearly forbids retaliatory action against an employee who discloses to a government agency the employer’s misappropriation of public funds” (Chin et al.

State v. Mercantile Guaranty Co.

263 Cal. App. 2d 346 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 21, 1968

The application of the estoppel doctrine in this area is a fairly old and well-established practice. … This fact alone does not establish that it would be inequitable to permit Mercantile to cease, to dissolve.

People v. Super. Court (Sanchez-Flores)

California Court of Appeal · Dec 16, 2015

Prunty (2015) 62 Cal.4th 59, 71, and the guidelines we follow are well-established. … A defendant pleads guilty or no contest to a qualifying misdemeanor charge. (§ 1001.94, subd. (b).)

Forcum v. Forcum

145 Cal. App. 3d 599 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 29, 1983

to the contrary.” 2 “The evident purposes of Civil Code section 4811 were to dispose of the abstruse and unprofitable jurisprudence which had grown up around the concepts of integration and severability [citations] and establish … In both cases the parties used language clearly intended to preclude modification of their agreed spousal support and the issue was whether the nonmodifiability provision of section 4811 was overcome by section 4801.5 ’s

Isaac v. Department of Motor Vehicles

66 Cal. Rptr. 3d 372 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 26, 2007

The *861 problem in Draeger was that the traffic citation was “insufficient, standing alone, to establish Draeger was convicted’ of the offense. (Id at p. 1523.) … This is clearly not the case.

Wilson v. Superior Court

194 Cal. App. 3d 1259 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 17, 1987

has not been established. … Code, § 26605), the sheriff is clearly not a neutral party to whom judicial power in this matter can be delegated.

Wong v. OHLONE COLLEGE

40 Cal. Rptr. 3d 923 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 28, 2006

Because the College established that there were no available positions, the court found Wong was not entitled to the requested relief. … Had the Legislature intended to make a section 87458 appointment nondiscretionary, the Legislature could have clearly done so by requiring that an administrator “shall become” a first-year probationary faculty member if he

Carson v. Mercury Insurance

210 Cal. App. 4th 409 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 24, 2012

Second, the policy clearly and unequivocally lists as one of the exclusions the diminution of value of a repaired vehicle. … Mercury’s policy now clearly defines its “repair” obligation as not including “diminution in value.”

Barber v. Boatright

115 Cal. App. 656 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 27, 1931

But in this case it clearly appears that the appellant took an active part in securing the execution of the will at a time when there existed a confidential relation between himself and Mrs.' Graves. … Appellant contends that the court erred in admitting the testimony of respondents’ witnesses, who gave their opinions regarding the mental sanity of the testatrix, because these witnesses had not qualified themselves as intimate

Taylor v. General Tel. Co. of Cal.

20 Cal. App. 3d 70 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 17, 1971

Plaintiff had six years to go to qualify for a pension as a matter of right. It does not appear that the trial court was attempting to give plaintiff a pro rata share of this type of pension. … The 1964 booklet, which was clearly not a full presentation of the Plan, stated the “eligibility” of such a person for a pension, not his entitlement to one as a matter of right.

Librers v. Black

28 Cal. Rptr. 3d 188 · California Court of Appeal · May 9, 2005

At the time of N.’s birth, Joseph signed a voluntary declaration of paternity “to qualify N. for health insurance and other benefits.” N. shares *118 Joseph’s surname. … more information to be able to establish that. ...

Prichard v. Liberty Mutual Insurance

101 Cal. Rptr. 2d 298 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 6, 2000

Clearly, Ringler represents the easier of the two contexts. … There was clearly no breach by Liberty in paying only its share of the defense costs.

Mercury Casulaty Co. v. Jones

8 Cal. App. 5th 561 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 10, 2017

This may be so, but that does not mean the regulation is immune from scrutiny under the First Amendment. … Finally, Mercury asserts that “[b]ased on its erroneous legal rulings, the Superior Court refused to exercise its independent judgment on the evidence establishing that [application of the rate formula] failed to yield a

Doyle v. Chief Oil Co.

64 Cal. App. 2d 284 · California Court of Appeal · May 9, 1944

With respect to all of this documentary evidence, i.e., the run tickets or crude oil invoices taken from the files of the two refineries, the pumper’s daily gauge reports and the blue book, it was clearly admissible under … The records may be adequately verified by the ‘custodian or other qualified witness.’ This is a point of departure from precedent.

Overholtzer v. Northern Counties Title Insurance

116 Cal. App. 2d 113 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 17, 1953

The contention that the Overholtzers’ answer admitted the validity and existence of the easement is clearly without merit. … Thus, whether or not the existence of the easement was placed into issue in the Musso litigation, clearly its validity, at least as to location, was there challenged.

Dow Chemical Co. v. Superior Court

2 Cal. App. 3d 1 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 21, 1969

To the contrary, his opinion is and will remain wholly irrelevant and immaterial as evidence until the expert is called as a witness on the trial and shown to be qualified to give competent opinion testimony on a matter in … The opinion of such witness and the reasons for such opinion where it is based upon open, known or discoverable facts are clearly discoverable by way of deposition.

People v. Williams

107 Cal. Rptr. 2d 135 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 12, 2001

The testifying officers were not qualified to interpret the results as a measurement of alcohol content in defendant's blood. C. … Where `the exclusionary rule does not result in appreciable deterrence, then, clearly, its use ... is unwarranted.' [Citation.]" ( Arizona v. Evans (1995) 514 U.S. 1, 10-11 , 115 S.Ct. 1185, 1191 , 131 L.Ed.2d 34, 44 .)

Regents of University of California v. Public Employment Relations Board

177 Cal. App. 3d 648 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 17, 1986

is clearly erroneous.” … However, even though the statutory language uses the phrase “other means of communication,” and clearly the particular banner spaces qualify as an “other means of communication,” it is true that the above statutory language

People v. Jones

4 Cal. Rptr. 3d 916 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 30, 2003

Mower (2002) 28 Cal.4th 457, 481 , 122 Cal.Rptr.2d 326 , 49 P.3d 1067 , a defendant need only raise a reasonable doubt whether he or she qualifies for the defense. … I agree that defendant's conviction must be reversed: Under the standard established by the California Supreme Court in People v.