Case law

Department of California Highway Patrol v. Superior Court

70 Cal. Rptr. 3d 280 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 4, 2008

Clearly, law enforcement officers bear the primary responsibility for enforcing equipment regulations. … Certainly, the Legislature could have specifically listed the infractions within the enumerated divisions that qualify as potentially correctable offenses.

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.)

City of Inglewood v. Kew

21 Cal. App. 611 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 4, 1913

.” *615 Thereafter an ordinance numbered 127 was enacted calling a special election to be held for the purpose of submitting to the qualified voters two propositions, to pay the cost of two certain improvements, one of which … We are of opinion that this ordinance failed to give such information to the voter, and the validity of such bonds is not established by the record in this case.

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.

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

Frastaci v. Vapor Corp.

70 Cal. Rptr. 3d 402 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 21, 2007

After discussing the difference between the broad liability under the FELA and the comparatively narrow circumstances under which. liability arises under the BIA and SAA, Compton concluded: “These cases clearly establish … Finally, we address plaintiffs’ assertion that a finding of preemption effectively immunizes Vapor from liability for its defective product. “Their contention assumes we write on a clean slate, but we do not.

Robert R. v. Gloria R.

88 Cal. App. 3d 11 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 4, 1979

II Robert R. next contends that even if the existence of fraud was not established in the proceeding to set aside the adoption, he was *16 entitled to rely on the fact that it was earlier established in the annulment proceedings … In other words, if an annulment clearly appears to be in the best interest of the welfare of the child, this alone would constitute proper grounds for annulment at the instance of either the natural or the foster parents.

Bonelli v. State of California

71 Cal. App. 3d 459 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 30, 1977

The latter funds, held in trust for *466 them by the state, simply fail to qualify under the offset provision as “any amount owing... by any state agency.” … Appellants’ petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied October 13, 1977. 1 It was not established at trial that Bonelli did, in fact, accept bribes. Both actions proceeded, however, upon that assumption.

Martinez v. Public Employees' Retirement System

California Court of Appeal · Apr 4, 2019

In short, they do not claim Martinez qualifies for any of the exceptions identified by Haywood and Smith. … Existing law permits the legislative body of a local agency to establish a pension trust, as specified, for the benefit of its officers and employees and permits that legislative body to establish reciprocal retirement benefits

Oneto v. City of Fresno

136 Cal. App. 3d 460 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 8, 1982

Permitting the City to use the arbitrary basis to establish the amount of the in lieu tax in effect places no limitation upon the amount of in lieu charge that may be collected by the City under section 1218. … Accordingly, I would hold that construing section 1218 as a whole and in order to effectuate its clear intent and purpose requires that the express limitations set forth in section 1218 qualify the authority of the City to

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.

Tabas v. Boshes CA2/7

California Court of Appeal · Jun 16, 2014

On August 19, 1998 the CSLB sent Serrano Const a letter accepting the application to change the qualifying partner for license number 571998 from Serrano to Barajas. … Nothing in this section affects any immunity that may otherwise exist apart from this section.” 19 he had known of the concealed or suppressed fact, and (5) as a result of the

Chambers v. Crown Asset Management, LLC

California Court of Appeal · Nov 12, 2021

“Thus, our Supreme Court has clearly stated that a court, before granting a petition to compel arbitration, must determine the factual issue of ‘the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement.’ [Citation.] … But in Jazayeri, “the means by which the DOA numbers were routinely recorded on the [documents] was sufficiently established by witnesses with firsthand knowledge of the process to qualify the evidence for admission under

Palos Verdes Shores Mobile Estates, Ltd. v. City of Los Angeles

142 Cal. App. 3d 362 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 26, 1983

covered by general law as to clearly indicate that it has become exclusively a matter of state concern; (2) the subject matter has been partially covered by general law couched in such terms as to indicate clearly that a … There is also no basis for concluding that the legislation shows a legislative intent to make the subject of mobilehome parks immune from local legislation. As was said by the court in Gluck v.

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.

Bus Riders Union v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Agency

179 Cal. App. 4th 101 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 19, 2009

Substantial evidence supports the conclusion that MTA’s proposed fare increase qualified for the CEQA exemption under section 21080, subdivision (b)(8). … It is well established that courts “may not speculate on the future intention of a public agency” (Viso v.

Center for Biological Diversity v. County of San Bernardino

188 Cal. App. 4th 603 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 17, 2010

In their motion for supplemental fees, plaintiffs clearly deducted the $50,000 originally awarded them. … The court found the hours “to be clearly excessive.” The court allowed 169 hours for three of the attorneys.

People v. Carothers

California Court of Appeal · Jul 12, 2017

In Hunt, we held a court-martial conviction in Germany for indecent acts with a child did not qualify as a conviction of a “sexually violent offense” within the meaning of the Sexually Violent Predators Act (SVPA). … This is not the same as holding an intent to cause serious bodily injury alone is sufficient to establish malice aforethought.

Department of Mental Hygiene v. Kolts

247 Cal. App. 2d 154 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 12, 1966

We do not believe that it was the intention of the Legislature to overrule or ignore the provision of the Civil Code establishing the fundamental rights and duties of marriage, the provisions of the Probate Code establishing … Furthermore, from the opinion’s analysis of Guardianship of Thrasher (1951) 105 Cal.App.2d 768 [ 234 P.2d 230 ], and Estate of Risse (1957) 156 Cal.App.2d 412 [ 319 P.2d 789 ] (60 Cal.2d at p. 719), and its failure to qualify

Epstein v. Vision Service Plan

California Court of Appeal · Oct 22, 2020

Second, it ruled the fact the step-one hearing process was neither binding nor immune from review, did not conclusively establish that it was not arbitration. (Id. at *3.) … But that said, there is no doubt VSP’s network provider agreement carries some degree of procedural unconscionability, given VSP’s overwhelming presence in the vision marketplace and the fact its provider agreement is clearly