Case law

Supervalu, Inc. v. Wexford Underwriting Managers, Inc.

175 Cal. App. 4th 64 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 24, 2009

Ambiguity can be established through extrinsic evidence. C. Latent ambiguity. … Here, occurrence was clearly used in a different sense.

People v. Lawson CA2/3

California Court of Appeal · Dec 1, 2025

Lawson’s 2019 plea did not categorically preclude him from establishing prima facie eligibility for section 1172.6 resentencing as to his attempted murder convictions. … Lawson established his prima facie eligibility for section 1172.6 relief as to his attempted murder convictions.

People v. Jefferson

California Court of Appeal · Aug 6, 2019

Accordingly, he has failed to establish a violation of his due process rights. (See People v. … “Evidence of the defendant’s mental disorder shall be provided by the defense and shall include a recent diagnosis by a qualified mental health expert.” (Ibid.)

Mitchell v. Tibbetts

131 Cal. App. 2d 480 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 14, 1955

Appellant was herself obviously disqualified as a *483 witness and had to depend upon the testimony of others to establish her cause. … The trial court had clearly and conclusively ruled that it would not entertain any testimony on the husband’s part as to any *485 matter or fact occurring prior to the death of the testatrix.

In Re Mary G.

59 Cal. Rptr. 3d 703 · California Court of Appeal · May 24, 2007

The Agency concedes that had Mary been born in California and had Frank signed here the identical form he signed in Michigan, he would qualify as a presumed father. … The [ICWA] clearly protects the right of the tribe independent from any rights held by either parent." ( In re Kahlen W. (1991) 233 Cal.App.3d 1414, 1425 , 285 Cal.Rptr. 507 .)

Bassi v. Bassi

California Court of Appeal · May 9, 2024

“Section 47 establishes a privilege that bars liability in tort for the making of certain statements.” (Hagberg v. California Federal Bank (2004) 32 Cal.4th 350, 360.) … (See Crossroads, supra, 13 Cal.App.5th at p. 788 [rejecting application of the litigation privilege based on an alleged oral agreement, where the privilege would effectually “immunize [the defendant] against any enforcement

Borelli v. Brusseau

12 Cal. App. 4th 647 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 19, 1993

That personal something—precisely because it was something she was not required to do—qualifies as valid consideration sufficient to make enforceable Mr. … A related development was the abolition of the comparable immunity granted parents from such suits by their children. (See Gibson v. Gibson (1971) 3 Cal.3d 914 [ 92 Cal.Rptr. 288 , 479 P.2d 648 ]; Emery v.

In Re Estate of Carter

4 Cal. Rptr. 3d 490 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 3, 2003

The two women had been bom out of wedlock, and the petitioner for administration had concluded that they did not qualify as heirs, and were therefore not entitled to personal notice under Probate Code section 8110. … While the Probate Code clearly requires that heirship established on that basis be by clear and convincing evidence (see Prob. Code, § 6453, subd.

In Re Marriage of Gram

25 Cal. App. 4th 859 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 7, 1994

The record on appeal reveals the particulars only of the enhanced early retirement option but the names of the others suggest their makeup: the newspapers established enhanced retirement, enhanced early retirement and voluntary … Each of these plans was clearly designed to deal with the needs of employees of differing ages, years of service and life expectations.

Wollmer v. City of Berkeley

179 Cal. App. 4th 933 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 24, 2009

Abuse of discretion is established if the respondent has not proceeded in the manner required by law, the order or decision is not supported by the findings, or the findings are not supported by the evidence.” … Wollmer fails to establish that the City has not proceeded in the manner required by law, that the order or decision is not supported by the findings, or that the findings are not supported by the evidence. (Code Civ.

Iscoff v. POLICE COMMISSION OF SAN FRANCISCO

222 Cal. App. 2d 395 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 19, 1963

The record before us, including the original application in question, is clearly to the contrary and shows that the application was made as we have stated. 2 On April 24, 1962, a hearing was held on the application before … Clearly appellant’s position here is that there is an absence of adequate standards anywhere.

Acosta v. Glenfed Development Corp.

28 Cal. Rptr. 3d 92 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 29, 2005

An individual can qualify for a license either in his own capacity or by a qualifying person acting as a responsible managing employee (RME). … A *1299 copartnership or limited partnership can qualify for a license either by a general partner or a qualifying person acting as an RME, and a corporation can qualify by a qualifying person acting as an RME or a responsible

Trent v. Fresno County Employees' Retirement Assn. CA5

California Court of Appeal · Jan 6, 2023

Ramsey was better qualified than Dr. Tran to speak to specific, major orthopedic issues, but Dr. Tran was more qualified to speak to Trent’s physical restrictions because he saw Trent much more frequently than Dr. … Thus, in order to admit these reports for purposes of the administrative hearing, the parties were not required to establish a proper foundation, by, for example, establishing the reports qualified as business records.

Doe v. City of Modesto CA5

California Court of Appeal · Oct 6, 2016

Sutter Coast Hosp. (2000) 80 Cal.App.4th 485, 490 [demurrer is properly sustained when complaint alleges facts that establish an affirmative defense of immunity]; see Bearman v. … California Medical Bd. (2009) 176 Cal.App.4th 1588, 1593 [demurrer may be based on defendant’s absolute or qualified immunity].)

Steinman v. Scandinavian Faith Mission

35 Cal. App. 2d 95 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 11, 1939

Testator died on November 13, 1937, the executor qualified and the will was duly admitted to probate on December 3, 1937. … It clearly appears from the record herein that Mrs.

Church of Scientology v. Wollersheim

42 Cal. App. 4th 628 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 1, 1996

In the instant action the Church’s actions clearly fall within the ambit of section 425.16. … (a)) would rarely, if ever, qualify as a SLAPP suit arising from petition activity.

Eith v. Ketelhut

California Court of Appeal · Dec 17, 2018

It disallowed the fees in their entirety because they are “not properly established.” … How can the operation of a commercial vineyard not qualify as commercial use?

In re Williams

California Court of Appeal · Jun 20, 2018

It is the intent of the Legislature to create a process by which growth and maturity of youthful offenders can be assessed and a meaningful opportunity for release established.” (Stats. 2013, ch. 312 (Sen. … The mandatory language clearly indicates that the entitlement awarded by section 3051 is not limited to a finding of suitability for parole, but extends to release. 9  3.

People v. Brown

131 Cal. App. 2d 643 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 21, 1955

Proc., § 1870, subd. 6) the conspiracy need be proved only to the extent of establishing prima facie evidence of that fact. (People v. Steccone, 36 Cal.2d 234, 238 [ 223 P.2d 17 ].) … The confession had been admitted as to Stoner only and the jury had been clearly so instructed.

Allen v. California Toll Bridge Authority

68 Cal. App. 3d 340 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 23, 1977

“Of course, such guides are not conclusive, and a clearly erroneous administrative construction will not govern interpretation by the court.” (Cal. M. Express v. St. … The Unemployment Insurance Act was expressly intended to establish a system of unemployment insurance to provide benefits for ‘persons unemployed through no fault of their own, and to reduce involuntary unemployment....’