Case law

Board of Education of the Palo Alto Unified School District v. Superior Court

93 Cal. App. 3d 578 · California Court of Appeal · May 30, 1979

The state’s high court has considered the nature and function of school districts and their governing boards. Hall v. … Younger v.

Stribling v. Mailliard

6 Cal. App. 3d 470 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 9, 1970

Brown Act cases applies. No means of enforcement of section 19(f) are described in the charter; wherefore, requirements of that section are directory and not mandatory. (Gowanlock v. … (Auberry Union School Dist. v. Rafferty, 226 Cal.App.2d 599, 602 [ 38 Cal.Rptr. 223 ]; Silver v. City of Los Angeles, 217 Cal.App.2d 134, 141 [ 31 Cal.Rptr. 545 ]; Wilson v.

Fugitt v. City of Placentia

70 Cal. App. 3d 868 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 13, 1977

(See Wiles v. State Personnel Board, 19 Cal.2d 344 [ 121 P.2d 673 ].) … (Stockton v. Dept. of Employment, 25 Cal.2d 264 , 273 . . . ; Wiles v. State Personnel Board, 19 Cal.2d 344 . . . .)” (Ahlstedt v. Board of Education, 79 Cal.App.2d 845, 857 [ 180 P.2d 949 ].)

Brown v. Deutsche Bank National Trust CA2/7

California Court of Appeal · Oct 3, 2024

Filed 10/3/24 Brown v. … (Yvanova v.

Preserve Shorecliff Homeowners v. City of San Clemente

71 Cal. Rptr. 3d 332 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 16, 2008

Board of Elections in the City of New York (2d Cir. 2000) 232 F.3d 135 (Lerman); and KZPZ Broadcasting v. Black Canyon Citizens (Ct.App. 2000) 199 Ariz. 30 [ 13 P.3d 772 ] (KZPZ). … Pre-Buckley: The Browne Decision a. What Browne Said There is, though, one pre-Buckley California Court of Appeal decision, Browne v.

McMahon v. Albany Unified School District

129 Cal. Rptr. 2d 184 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 31, 2002

In support of this proposition, McMahon relies on In re Bushman (1970) 1 Cal.3d 767 [ 83 Cal.Rptr. 375 , 463 P.2d 727 ], In re Brown (1973) 9 Cal.3d 612 [ 108 Cal.Rptr. 465 , 510 P.2d 1017 ] and Jefferson v. … In Ervin v.

California Eye Institute v. Superior Court

215 Cal. App. 3d 1477 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 22, 1989

(See also Brown v. Superior Court (1985) 168 Cal.App.3d 489, 501 [ 214 Cal.Rptr. 266 ].) … In Brown v.

Lewis v. American Hoist & Derrick Co.

20 Cal. App. 3d 570 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 14, 1971

As stated in Elmore v. … (Barth v. B. F.

Curtis v. San Mateo Junior College District

28 Cal. App. 3d 161 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 17, 1972

Opinion BROWN (H. C.), J. This is an appeal from the denial of a writ of mandate. … The sections clearly appear to be a response to a *164 potential problem posed by the cases of Cullen v. Board of Education, 126 Cal.App. 510 [ 15 P.2d 227 , 16 P.2d 272 ], and Anderson v.

In Re Marriage of Mueller

70 Cal. App. 3d 66 · California Court of Appeal · May 24, 1977

Early in 1968 a physical evaluation board found that due to his disability he was “not qualified for military service.” … (In re Marriage of Brown, supra, 15 Cal.3d at p. 850; In re Marriage of Cavnar, supra, 62 Cal.App.3d at p. 664.)

Pescosolido v. Smith

142 Cal. App. 3d 964 · California Court of Appeal · May 12, 1983

*967 Opinion BROWN (G. A.), P. J. The Planning Director of the County of Tulare appeals from an order of the superior court which reversed a decision of the Tulare County Board of Supervisors (Board). … On appeal by Pescosolidos to the Board, the Board affirmed the decision of the parcel map committee. Discussion As noted, the trial court applied the independent judgment test established in Strumsky v.

Brown v. Dept. of Corrections and Rehabilitation CA3

California Court of Appeal · Sep 23, 2024

Filed 9/23/24 Brown v. … by the State Personnel Board.

People v. Brown CA6

California Court of Appeal · Aug 18, 2016

F24663) v. WILLIAM ODESSA BROWN, Defendant and Appellant. A jury found defendant William Odessa Brown guilty of assault with a deadly weapon. (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. … People v Brown H040734

San Luis Obispo County Employees' Ass'n v. Freeman

30 Cal. App. 3d 511 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 13, 1973

In enacting Resolution No. 68-39, the Employee Relations Policy, the board was acting pursuant to the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act. (Ch. 10, div. (4) of Gov. Code, §§ 3500-3509; Stats. 1961, ch. 1964.) … Employees Union v. County of Alameda, 3 Cal.App.3d 578, 584 [ 83 Cal.Rptr. 503 ].)

Pranger v. Break

186 Cal. App. 2d 551 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 21, 1960

I, § 9 ; Board of Education v. Swan, 41 Cal.2d 546 [ 261 P.2d 261 ].) … (Brown v. Board of Police Commissioners, 2 Cal.App.2d 245 [ 37 P.2d 737 ] ; Christie v. Lueth, 265 Wis. 326 [ 61 N.W.2d 338 ].)

State School Building Finance Committee v. Betts

216 Cal. App. 2d 685 · California Court of Appeal · May 28, 1963

(Sutter Basin Corp. v. Brown, 40 Cal.2d 235, 241 [ 253 P.2d 649 ], cert. den. 346 U.S. 855 [ 74 S.Ct. 71 , 98 L.Ed. 369 ]; County of San Bernardino v. Way, 18 Cal.2d 647, 661 [ 117 P.2d 354 ]; Golden Gate Bridge etc. … (Compare, Sutter Basin Corp. v. Brown, supra, 40 Cal.2d 235 ; Shouse v. Quinley, 3 Cal.2d 357 [45 P.2d 701]; County of Los Angeles v. Rockhold, 3 Cal.2d 192 [ 44 P.2d 340 , 100 A.L.R. 149 ]; St. Louis Union Trust Co. v.

Brittenbaker v. Buck

58 Cal. App. 738 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 9, 1922

(Ruddick v. Albertson, 154 Cal. 640, 644 [ 98 Pac. 1045 ].) … That question was discussed in the case of Clark v. Brown (Tex. Civ.), 108 S.

Laguna Royale Owners Assn. v. Darger

119 Cal. App. 3d 670 · California Court of Appeal · May 28, 1981

Brown and Geneva B. Brown (collectively the other defendants) without the approval of Laguna Royale Owners Association (Association). … By subdivision (M)(6) of section 2 of article V of the bylaws the board is empowered to “prescribe reasonable regulations pertaining to ...

Koss v. Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control

215 Cal. App. 2d 489 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 25, 1963

(Martin v. Alcoholic Beverage etc. Appeals Board, supra, 55 Cal.2d 867, 880 ; Martin v. Alcoholic Beverage etc. Appeals Board, supra, 52 Cal.2d 238, 248 ; Torres v. … J., and Brown (G), J., concurred.

Billings v. Health Plan of America

225 Cal. App. 3d 250 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 16, 1990

(See Weil and Brown, Cal. Practice Guide: Civ. Proc. Before Trial (Rutter 1990) Defaults, §§ 5:182.1-5:182.16 (hereafter Weil and Brown).) … Proc., § 473; see Weil and Brown, supra, § 5:182.2.) The court must also find that the default was actually caused by the attorney’s mistake, inadvertence, surprise or neglect. (Bee-man v.