Case law

Nuland v. Pruyn

99 Cal. App. 2d 603 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 25, 1950

out the uncertainties therein, the court said: 11 ‘ Thus we could proceed and point out other language of the contract which, taken alone or viewed in connection with the provisions of the instrument above referred to, clearly … implies that the contract was intended to establish the relation of principal and agents between the parties and not intended as a contract for the sale of the goods; but it is unnecessary further to examine the contract

People v. Martinez

113 Cal. Rptr. 2d 229 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 23, 2002

Thus, we will not presume an intent to overthrow long-established principles unless such intention is clearly expressed or necessarily implied. (See People v. … In our view, if the Legislature had intended to establish a new and additional form of solicitation, it would have done so clearly, expressly, and unambiguously; it would not have employed the single phrase "solicits another

Board of Medical Quality Assurance v. Andrews

211 Cal. App. 3d 1346 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 29, 1989

author also observes that persons who hold themselves out as having special scientific knowledge, outside the realm of ordinary experience, must be subject to regulation for protection of the public, and may not seek the immunity … That protection clearly does not extend to dangerous religious practices including unauthorized practice of medicine.

Reclamation District No. 70 v. Sherman

11 Cal. App. 399 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 29, 1909

That it is within the power of the legislature to repeal laws creating reclamation districts is a proposition well established. … The trial court made no specific finding as to the days upon which the meetings were held, but the judge, in rendering his decision, said: “I think the evidence clearly shows it was done at some meeting other than a regular

Estate of Tucker

130 Cal. App. 2d 699 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 11, 1955

Thus to create a valid and enforceable testamentary provision for one’s benefit, it must clearly appear that the testator intended to govern and control the conduct of the party to whom the language of the will is addressed … Such provisions are utterly inconsistent with an intent to qualify that which the testator gave to Florence Medealf as an individual, or to impose any charge in the nature of a trust.

Jacobs Farm/Del Cabo, Inc. v. Western Farm Service, Inc.

190 Cal. App. 4th 1502 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 20, 2010

When private litigation threatens to interfere with the Legislature’s clearly expressed policies, it is precluded. … Furthermore, defendant’s argument is, in effect, that where the claim relates only to the place, a use permit makes a defendant absolutely immune from liability.

In re Martinez

California Court of Appeal · Jan 30, 2014

Section 1170.126 also establishes a procedure for qualified inmates serving indeterminate life sentences under the three strikes law to seek resentencing under the terms of the amended law. … Martinez's position presents a unique situation that section 1170.126, subdivision (e) does not clearly address.

King v. Emerson

110 Cal. App. 414 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 15, 1930

Appellants contend that the evidence is insufficient to establish the foregoing facts, which, like any other facts in the case, are for the determination of the jury. [7] The verdict of the jury and their implied findings … An employer cannot claim immunity from liability for damages done to an innocent third party by his employee because the law in respect to such employment has not been complied with.

Epic Communications, Inc. v. Richwave Technology, Inc.

179 Cal. App. 4th 314 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 17, 2009

This is too ambiguous to establish that she was in Taiwan when she signed. … Pao elsewhere clearly declares that plaintiffs Epic Communications, Inc. (Epic), and EpicCom did not exist until November 2004 and February 2005, respectively.

Contreras v. Dowling

5 Cal. App. 5th 394 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 26, 2016

Contreras Cannot Establish a Probability of Prevailing on her Claim. … Clearly, that is not the situation before us. 15 As the Restatement explains, “The lawyer’s efforts in a representation must be for the benefit of the client [citation].

Harris v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board

212 Cal. App. 2d 106 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 21, 1963

If such a policy of enforcement were adopted it would mean that the license of offending premises in a notorious neighborhood could not be suspended or revoked unless that Department clearly demonstrated that the establishment … Conceivably under such a *120 policy, concerted action on the part of a number of licensees to harbor the drunken patron would render all immune from discipline under the umbrella of the resultant “area” conditions.

Harrington-Wisely v. California CA2/7

California Court of Appeal · Apr 28, 2015

Wisely asserts the requirement visitors submit to scanning by the Secure 1000 as a condition of visitation was “clearly a form of coercion” within the ambit of the Bane Act. … a state prison qualifies as a business establishment. 15  3.

Stoneman v. Fritz

34 Cal. App. 2d 26 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 28, 1939

Fritz, nieces of deceased, were appointed and qualified as administratrices of her estate with the will annexed. … Clearly, this was the only construction that properly could be put upon the language of the statute then in effect.

Douglass v. Board of Medical Quality Assurance

141 Cal. App. 3d 645 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 5, 1983

He also found Douglass’ conduct to be clearly excessive prescribing of dmgs. The ALJ also determined BMQA failed to establish Douglass had prescribed drags to Scolaro without conducting good faith prior examinations. … Those matters in Scolaro’s medical records written by Douglass qualify under this provision as well.

Lee v. Crusader Insurance

49 Cal. App. 4th 1750 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 17, 1996

The letter also referred to Insurance Code section 1875.4, which immunizes an insurer from civil liability for cooperating in an arson investigation absent fraud or malice. … Nonetheless, the record clearly establishes that Crusader was informed of a fire department arson investigation less than a month after the Lees’ loss.

People v. Lipsett

California Court of Appeal · Feb 21, 2020

“Taken together, these precepts establish that a trial court does not abuse its discretion unless its decision is so irrational or arbitrary that no reasonable person could agree with it.” (Ibid.) … (c)), clearly indicated its intent that the statute apply only prospectively. (See maj. opn. ante, pp. 12-13.)

In re Walton

99 Cal. App. 4th 934 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 26, 2002

As indicated previously, the essence of Walton’s claim deals with his illness associated with acquired immune deficiency syndrome. … But, as mentioned previously, the United States Supreme Court has spoken clearly and without hesitation on the subject in the aforementioned cases before the high court.

People v. Rubio

California Court of Appeal · Dec 13, 2019

But our case, with no sign of blood and no witnesses reporting injury, is clearly distinguishable. … In Ryburn, the Court was not deciding whether an unwarranted intrusion into the home violated the Fourth Amendment, but whether police officers were entitled to qualified immunity from suit (id. at pp. 472, 477), an issue

California School Employees Ass'n v. Foothill Community College District

52 Cal. App. 3d 150 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 25, 1975

Teachers clearly point out disharmony from speech is a natural by-product and any limitation or penalty imposed in the name of prevention of disharmony is an attack on speech. … Further, it has been established in California for some time that a person cannot be barred from public employment arbitrarily or in disregard of his constitutional rights (Fort v.

Respers v. University of California Retirement System

171 Cal. App. 3d 864 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 29, 1985

Keenan testified she thought plaintiff was qualified to be a communications assistant at the Medical Center. Keenan also testified plaintiff was qualified for the position of senior clerk. … Nor is the Board’s obligation to make findings affected by the Regents’ status as a constitutionally established entity. In Robinson v.