Case law

Middlecoff v. Middlecoff

199 Cal. App. 2d 22 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 9, 1962

Estate of Robinson, 192 Cal.App.2d 847, 851 [ 13 Cal.Rptr. 842, 844 ], “But where, as here, the interest of the beneficiary under the earlier will is expressly challenged, the court may nevertheless require such person to establish … It is obvious that Henry Hubbard Middlecoff, the general guardian of Robert Fitch Middlecoff, has an adverse *30 interest to the incompetent; that he is therefore disqualified to act for him; and that an independent and qualified

Roberts Distributing Co. v. Kaye-Halbert Corp.

126 Cal. App. 2d 664 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 23, 1954

The general rule, when a question is to be determined from prepared data, is that where possible the data to establish a fact must be laid before the court. … Over plaintiff’s objection, Kaye, defendant’s president, was asked whether there is an established practice for an adjustment in the advertising fund when sets are returned by a distributor.

People v. DeJourney

192 Cal. App. 4th 1091 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 17, 2011

Counsel additionally thought that the subject area could not be narrowly tailored enough for this case to qualify Davies’s testimony. … The court noted that she was clearly not “your run-of-the-mill adult woman” and that she clearly suffered from significant intellectual deficits and physical challenges.

Holman v. County of Butte CA3

California Court of Appeal · May 12, 2025

It establishes the general rule that public entities are immune from tort liability except as provided by statute. (Gov. Code, § 815, subd. (a); San Bernardino, supra, 62 Cal.4th at p. 179.) … It 17 explained: “The term ‘child abuse or neglect’ is clearly defined. [Citations.]

California Pear Growers Ass'n v. Herspring

60 Cal. App. 503 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 22, 1923

a short-lived fruit, the picking of which could not be regulated by its owners; it had to be shipped as it fell during the season when it was available ; and without the experience that the business required, without an established … Herspring did the very best he could under the circumstances, but his plant does not seem to have been qualified to handle such a large amount of fruit as came to him under the terms of his contract.”

Mesecher v. County of San Diego

9 Cal. App. 4th 1677 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 1, 1992

To hold otherwise would destroy the rule . . . which clearly prohibits the upsetting of a jury verdict by assailing these subjective mental processes. … Krouse said juror declarations are admissible to impeach a verdict where the declarations establish “an express agreement” to violate the court’s instructions “or extensive discussion evidencing an implied agreement to that

Ndizeye v. City of San Diego CA4/1

California Court of Appeal · May 21, 2025

This qualifies as “a suit for money or damages . . . against a public entity” for which presentation of a claim is required by the Act. (Gov. … He asserts that although his second amended complaint “clearly (TrafficSchoolOnline, Inc. v. Clarke (2003) 112 Cal.App.4th 736, 741; Gatto v.

City of Richmond v. Service Employees International Union

189 Cal. App. 4th 663 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 25, 2010

The public policy on this point is well defined and clearly expressed in state and federal law. (Gov. Code, § 12920; 42 U.S.C. § 2000e~2(a)(l); 29 C.ER. § 1604.11(a) (2010).) … But nothing in the arbitrator’s award or findings establishes a breach of duty toward the alleged victims.

Steagall v. The Alpha Epsilon Pi Foundation CA2/3

California Court of Appeal · Jul 22, 2022

host immunity. … This social host immunity applies to the failure to supervise people who drink alcohol at social events. (Allen, at p. 54.) There is an exception to the social host immunity.

Daniels v. Robbins

182 Cal. App. 4th 204 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 24, 2010

The record clearly supports an inference that Young brought the underlying case with malice; his personal relationship with and alleged threats to Karl suggest his subjective intent in pursuing the baseless underlying suit … A special motion to strike a SLAPP action, codified in . . . section 425.16, provides a procedural remedy to gain an early dismissal of a lawsuit or a cause of action that qualifies as a SLAPP.” (Slaney v. Ranger Ins.

Mao's Kitchen, Inc. v. Mundy

209 Cal. App. 4th 132 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 10, 2012

They further contended that MKI did not qualify for the “original source” exception to the public disclosure jurisdictional bar. … MKI explained that beginning July 1, 2009, Medi-Cal eligibility was added as an automatic qualifier for fee waivers.

People v. Stephens

117 Cal. App. 2d 653 · California Court of Appeal · May 6, 1953

The elements necessary to establish the claim of forgery (Pen. Code, § 470) are: (1) signing the name of another; (2) with intent to defraud; and (3) without authority to do so. … But the expert testified he could not give a “definite” opinion and that his opinion was a “qualified” one. It is also significant that from the time Mrs.

People v. Eddy

32 Cal. App. 4th 1098 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 28, 1995

[Worktime credit shall be awarded on a one-for-one basis for prisoners who actually participate in full-time qualifying programs.] . . . … Thus, the Court of Appeal reasoned, ‘the electorate clearly intended service of 10 calendar years by a second-degree murderer before parole consideration,’ and the Legislature could not alter that scheme without voter approval

Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1277 v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority

132 Cal. Rptr. 2d 207 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 28, 2003

The statutory language establishing workers’ compensation as an exclusive remedy against an employer provides that an employee’s industrial injury precludes an employee from bringing “an action at law for damages against … Unless the parties have clearly and unmistakably provided otherwise, the preliminary question of whether parties to a collective bargaining agreement have agreed to arbitrate a particular dispute is decided by the court,

Collum v. Pope & Talbot, Inc.

135 Cal. App. 2d 653 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 27, 1955

These significant factors we find clearly and cogently expressed by Justice Traynor in his concurring opinion in Escola v. … Any express warranty seems clearly precluded by these changes.

Cochran v. Cochran

106 Cal. Rptr. 2d 899 · California Court of Appeal · May 22, 2001

The court reasoned that the defendant should not be able to immunize himself from criminal liability for injuring a cohabitant simply because he lived part-time somewhere else with another. (44 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1333-1335 … To require nothing short of full-time cohabitation before enforcing an agreement would defeat the reasonable expectations of persons who may clearly enjoy a significant and stable relationship arising from cohabitation, albeit

People v. Gonzales CA6

California Court of Appeal · Mar 27, 2015

The Supreme Court’s longstanding “penalty cases” jurisprudence established this rule decades ago. (Uniformed Sanitation Men Ass’n v. … Chavez was a civil action involving qualified immunity in which the issue was whether a police officer who allegedly compelled statements from the plaintiff could be held liable for violating the plaintiff’s civil rights.

Regents of the University of Cal. v. Pub. Employment Relations Bd.

California Court of Appeal · Jun 25, 2020

We further find PERB’s holding that it lacked discretion to require proof of majority support from UPTE was not clearly erroneous. 1. … (See Boling, supra, 5 Cal.5th at p. 912 [“ ‘We follow PERB’s interpretation unless it is clearly erroneous.’ ”].) III.

Hart v. Wielt

4 Cal. App. 3d 224 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 6, 1970

He was generally qualified by counsel as being proficient in determining particular speeds for various highway conditions. … It is generally established that traffic officers whose duties include investigations of automobile accidents are qualified experts and may properly testify concerning their opinions as to the various factors involved in

People v. Cohn

30 Cal. App. 3d 738 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 22, 1973

However, with another informant (her husband), she turned the box over to the officer who was presumably better qualified to make an identification of the substance as marijuana than was the maid in Krauss . … X or her husband in order to establish the existence of probable cause for the arrest.