Case law

Chen v. Superior Court

13 Cal. Rptr. 3d 248 · California Court of Appeal · May 20, 2004

Clearly she is not a necessary party since a decision may be reached in her absence. … Kim was convicted of a federal tax felony and apparently fled the country prior to his sentencing date. 14 In order to establish a claim or defense based on equitable estoppel, a party must establish four elements: “(1) The

Aguimatang v. California State Lottery

234 Cal. App. 3d 769 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 25, 1991

As director of GTECH, Paster was qualified to provide the foundational basis for the business records. … The play slip clearly stated that, other than the $5 prizes, “all other payouts are calculated by a parimutuel formula.”

Singh v. Burkhart

218 Cal. App. 2d 285 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 15, 1963

are not entitled to specific performance because the defendants’ agent exhibited bad faith, in that the two brokers were to share the commission under the multiple listing agreement; that the evidence was insufficient to establish … Clearly the evidence shows there was no such adjudication on the date of the contract. So therefore the evidence that could be presented to this Court to bear on that issue would be further testimony from Mr.

People v. Garcia

92 Cal. Rptr. 2d 339 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 22, 2000

The court’s idea of what would qualify a group as cognizable is indicated by its citation to its earlier decision in Castaneda v. … Lesbians and gay men qualify under this standard.

County of Santa Clara v. Atlantic Richfield Co.

40 Cal. Rptr. 3d 313 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 3, 2006

To qualify, and thus be enjoinable [or abatable], the interference must be both substantial and unreasonable.” (People ex rel. Gallo v. Acuna (1997) 14 Cal.4th 1090, 1105 [ 60 Cal.Rptr.2d 277 , 929 P.2d 596 ] (Acuna).) … Clearly their complaint was adequate to allege the existence of a public nuisance for which these entities, acting as the People, could seek abatement.

Kathryn S. v. Vincenzo C.

212 Cal. App. 4th 188 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 29, 2012

Appellant has a hereditary chronic condition called primary immune deficiency, for which he has to have an intravenous infusion every 21 days. … The Legislature further found that a “simple system allowing for establishment of voluntary paternity will result in a significant increase in the ease of establishing paternity, a significant increase in paternity establishment

City of Los Angeles v. Moore Business Forms, Inc.

247 Cal. App. 2d 353 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 20, 1966

Moore’s contention is without merit since the court clearly indicates that it imposed upon Moore only that burden of proof traditionally placed upon the taxpayer attempting to upset an allocation formula as arbitrary or unreasonable … The court held a trial de novo and found the assessment to be reasonable based upon that evidence. “ ‘The general rule, applicable here, is that a taxpayer claiming immunity from a tax has the burden of establishing his exemption

Galeb v. Cupertino Sanitary District

227 Cal. App. 2d 294 · California Court of Appeal · May 19, 1964

The transcript and maps do not clearly show the total number of lots connected to the community sewer line before its acquisition by the district. … In any event, the resolution would clearly be relevant on the issue of damages. It is before us as a public record erroneously excluded.

Kerins v. Hartley

27 Cal. App. 4th 1062 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 23, 1994

The record clearly establishes that there is no “significant” risk that appellant will in the future develop AIDS as the result of exposure to HIV during the surgery performed by Dr. Gordon. … Rather, she took the position that the condition was clearly implied, and Dr.

Cummings v. Cummings

263 Cal. App. 2d 661 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 3, 1968

The testator’s son Ronald qualified as executor under the original will but resigned following an appellate determination that the estate rather than the donees should pay state gift taxes attributable to certain inter vivos … (Estate of Hill, 214 Cal.App.2d 812, 816 [ 29 Cal.Rptr. 814 ].) ‘1 Since the burden of establishing a reason for nonapportionment seems to have been placed by most statutes upon those contending for that result, it would

Wright & Kimbrough v. Carly

11 Cal. App. 325 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 16, 1909

Clarence Carly, was “the duly .appointed, qualified and acting guardian of the estate of said minor.” … The pleading, by its averments, very clearly, we think, declares that the plaintiff became the purchaser of the real estate involved—the undivided one-third interest each of two of the three devisees named in the will of

Jackson v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center

220 Cal. App. 3d 1315 · California Court of Appeal · May 30, 1990

Jackson argues vigorously that the procedural safeguards created by the LPS Act establish newly created rights. … Obviously, the rules that have been established by these section 338 cases offer some guidance for deciding the case before us.

Butterfield v. Northwestern National Insurance

100 Cal. App. 3d 974 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 11, 1980

referring to an action against *977 the notary “on his bond” contemplates a situation in which his, i.e., the notary’s bond, is something different and apart from the surety bond the notary is required by statute to file before qualifying … Prior California decisions have clearly established that statutes . of limitations so worded do not govern suits against a surety.” {Id. at p. 632, italics added.)

People v. Soni

36 Cal. Rptr. 3d 864 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 20, 2005

After receiving that fee, Soni informed them that they could not qualify for the loan, so they would have to list their son, Samir Aslam, on the title. … It establishes that “[f]or the purpose of determining the applicable limitation of time” for a wobbler, it must be deemed a felony. (See § 805.)

People v. Danford

14 Cal. App. 442 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 3, 1910

The record discloses that at the time the list of jurors were selected Catalina township, in said county, contained twenty-five inhabitants competent and in every way qualified to act as jurors in the trial of cases in the … Conceding such fact, however, to have been established, nevertheless, it cannot be said the persons (in this case, a majority of the judges of the superior court) whose duty it was to make the lists of the names of jurors

Hardy v. America's Best Home Loans

232 Cal. App. 4th 795 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 22, 2014

While federal common law also governs the claim-preclusive effect of a dismissal by a federal court sitting in diversity, the federal Supreme Court concluded there was no need to establish a uniform federal rule since state … Here, the district court’s penalty dismissal did not clearly decide any issue in the case. Therefore, the issues raised in this action are not barred by collateral estoppel or issue preclusion.

Payne v. Anaheim Memorial Medical Center, Inc.

130 Cal. App. 4th 729 · California Court of Appeal · May 31, 2005

Payne argued the doctrine established in Westlake Community Hosp. v. … There must be ‘clearly defined machinery’ for the submission, evaluation and resolution of complaints by aggrieved parties.” In either case, the procedure offered must be fair.

Suzuki v. City of Los Angeles

44 Cal. App. 4th 263 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 8, 1996

were established. . . . … Granting that a zoning ordinance may operate retroactively where there is clearly an element of nuisance, it does not follow that a similar disposition may be made of every type of nonconforming use dealt with in zoning.'

Claudio v. Regents of University of Cal.

35 Cal. Rptr. 3d 837 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 22, 2005

McLean then looked for non-animal-care jobs at the University campus for which plaintiff may have qualified according to his resume, but there were no openings. … McLean then looked for non-animal-care jobs at the University campus for which plaintiff may have qualified according to his resume, but there were no openings.

People v. McGrath

104 Cal. App. 2d 1 · California Court of Appeal · May 1, 1951

In at least four of these estates it is clearly indicated that either the decedents or the heirs were Jews. … Appellant also called one Oppenheimer, who qualified as an expert on German law.