Case law

Upjohn Co. v. Brewer

225 Cal. App. 3d 353 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 16, 1990

The Governor would clearly have had the power to veto section 45.5 if it had been passed by the Legislature as a separate bill. … After plaintiff filed its petition for writ of mandate, the Legislature established an entirely different procedure for adding drugs to the formulary.

Armstrong v. Wallace

8 Cal. App. 2d 429 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 22, 1935

App. 310 [ 173 Pac. 1008 ], that ‘Upon this showing the court was clearly correct in directing a verdict for defendant, under the rule laid down in Thomas v. German Gen. … Appellant strongly urges that what constitutes proper practice can be established only by expert testimony.

Cosenza v. Northey CA5

California Court of Appeal · Apr 29, 2026

However, the July 15, 2022 order qualified the award of joint legal custody with respect to the child’s medical care. … Cosenza disputed Northey’s characterization and stated K.C.’s immunizations were up to date and introduced her immunization record into evidence.

Williams v. Superior Court

230 Cal. App. 4th 636 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 14, 2014

The petition stated that on May 20, Parole had established probable cause for the alleged parole violation. … Clearly the courts are not the ‘state’s parole authority’ after July 1, 2013.

CC-California Plaza Associates v. Paller & Goldstein

51 Cal. App. 4th 1042 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 19, 1996

Johanson, who was qualified as an expert on the type of work Paller did on Cal Plaza’s building, testified that, contrary to applicable industry standards, Paller neglected to seal bolt hole penetrations left by the subcontractor … That ruling was, in our view, clearly correct.

Eastern Municipal Water District v. Superior Court

69 Cal. Rptr. 3d 314 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 19, 2007

This sum represented the current appraisal of the easement and expected severance damages by a qualified appraiser hired by the district. … In such a case, section 1263.110, subdivision (a), establishes the date of deposit as the date of valuation. The logic behind this is simple.

City of Commerce v. National Starch & Chemical Corp.

118 Cal. App. 3d 1 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 17, 1981

It is well established that the value of fixtures is to be taken into consideration in determining severance damages. … the jury in discriminating the purposes for which evidence of the future expansion plans of the church would be inadmissible (e.g., mere frustration of future plans of the owner) from those as to which the evidence was clearly

People v. Laird

California Court of Appeal · Sep 21, 2018

A statute will not be applied retroactively unless there is clearly intent to do so. (Id. at p. 319; § 3 ["No part of [the Penal Code] is retroactive, unless expressly so declared."].) … We concluded that the amendments to the DNA Database Act, read in conjunction with Proposition 47, prohibits DNA expungement when a felony is reduced to something less serious because the guilty plea established a qualifying

People Ex Rel. Williamson v. Rinner

52 Cal. App. 747 · California Court of Appeal · May 24, 1921

At the time of said repeal, and for some time prior thereto, the defendants were the duly acting and qualified trustees of the said Courthouse School District and they claim that their right to said office has not been affected … Manifestly, the residue of said provision can afford appellant no comfort, since it is clearly confined to “cities and towns heretofore organized,” etc., and- “cities and towns heretofore and hereafter organized.”

Rafeiro v. American Employers' Insurance

5 Cal. App. 3d 799 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 24, 1970

“Floyd Lowe, an experienced and qualified realtor as well as Inheritance Tax Appraiser, was called to establish the extent of property damage suf *803 fered as a result of the conditions to which the previous discussion more … If, in this case, there was no such damage established in the prior suit by plaintiff against the insurer’s insured, and the damage established was excluded, it is unnecessary to pursue further the question of whether and

Feehan v. Super. Ct.

California Court of Appeal · Sep 13, 2024

Legal parenthood can be established in a number of different ways. … principles of law unless such intention is made clearly to appear either by express declaration or by necessary implication.”

Slivkoff v. Bd. of Trs. of Cal. State Univ. & Colls.

69 Cal. App. 3d 394 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 27, 1977

The context of Government Code section 19143 clearly requires that the word “employee” as therein used apply to both exempt and civil service employees. … The rules thus authorized clearly *404 are rules “pursuant” 3 to law. “[0]ther applicable provisions of law” patently include the provisions of the Government Code.

People v. Vigil

169 Cal. App. 4th 8 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 12, 2008

With respect to both actions, defendant admitted that his prior conviction qualified as a “strike” within the meaning of the “Three Strikes” law. (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12.) … He also admitted that his prior conviction qualified as a serious felony with respect to action No. CC503983. (Pen. Code, § 667, subd. (a).) *11 In action No.

In Re Marriage of Hug

154 Cal. App. 3d 780 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 20, 1984

Concluding that the incentive pay was entirely the husband’s separate property, the court pointed out that the pay was clearly awarded in exchange for future services. (Id., at p. 333.) … Presumably he will refrain from selling the stock until the gain qualifies for capital gains treatment.

People v. Ricky T.

105 Cal. Rptr. 2d 165 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 19, 2001

Clearly, if any experience of fear constitutes a “sustained” experience, then the term is superfluous. … It is this court’s opinion that section 422 was not enacted to punish an angry adolescent’s utterances, unless they otherwise qualify as terrorist threats under that statute.

People v. Garcia

166 Cal. App. 3d 1056 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 16, 1985

Joinder of the sexual misconduct charges with the marijuana charges was clearly proper. … Prejudice will not be assumed and must be clearly established by the defendant (Williams v. Superior Court (1984) 36 Cal.3d 441 [ 204 Cal. Rptr. 700 , 683 P.2d 699 ]).

In Re Marincovich

48 Cal. App. 474 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 10, 1920

We have no fault to find with petitioner’s contention that the sovereignty and jurisdiction of this state extend only to such places as are within its boundaries as established by the constitution. (Pol. Code, sec. 33.) … Nor has the state, in its definition of her boundary, clearly and unequivocally expressed an intention to reject that sovereignty which, unless clearly renounced by her, she' rightfully has over a belt of water, three miles

Mercury Casualty Company v. City of Pasadena

California Court of Appeal · Aug 24, 2017

Only two of those opinions, Regency and City of Pasadena, discussed whether a city-owned tree qualifies as a work of public improvement for purposes of inverse condemnation.12 12 Boxer addressed only whether the alleged … Because the City could not be held inversely liable for the damage caused to the Dusseaults’ home by the tree, we reverse the judgment.14 Our holding, of course, does not immunize the City from all forms of liability for

People v. Freeman

53 Cal. Rptr. 3d 898 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 5, 2007

Several federal courts have considered the appearance of bias issue in the context of habeas corpus proceedings, and, relying on United States Supreme Court decisions, have concluded there is no clearly established federal … Even assuming that Oakley would be immunized from culpability for kidnapping if Freeman had the right to take her child (and thus Freeman would in turn be immunized from the crime of solicitation to commit kidnapping), the

Hughes v. Alexis

170 Cal. App. 3d 800 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 30, 1985

sufficient alone to support a finding, noting that evidence which is “admissible” is not necessarily “sufficient” to support a finding absent other competent evidence. (33 Cal.3d at p. 538 & fn. 3.) 9 “Unlike statutes that clearly … under section 13353 would qualify under Evidence Code section 1271 as a business record or under Evidence Code section 1280 as an official record.