Case law

Apollo Capital Fund, LLC v. Roth Capital Partners, LLC

70 Cal. Rptr. 3d 199 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 20, 2007

Others, however, appear rather clearly to be a proper basis for a fraud claim. … Clearly, no facts are alleged giving rise to a fiduciary relationship with any investor other than Sedaghat.

Shannon v. Superior Court

217 Cal. App. 3d 986 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 31, 1990

Palo Alto Inn Inc. (1967) 249 Cal.App.2d 706, 712 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 787 ].) 4 *993 A receiver is not immune from responsibility for his or her acts. … When met, the burden shifts to the opponent, the real parties here, to establish a cognizable basis for compelling disclosure. (Evid. Code, § 917.)

Lompoc Federation of Teachers Local 3151 v. Lompoc Unified School District

58 Cal. App. 3d 701 · California Court of Appeal · May 26, 1976

The Trial Court’s Findings Establish the Propriety of Respondents’ Salary Schedule The trial court’s findings establish that intermediate teachers were classified differently than primary or secondaiy teachers in respect … The above cited cases all so qualify the general power of the administrative agencies to fix the salaries of permanent teachers.”

People v. Sogoian CA3

California Court of Appeal · Jun 6, 2016

In that case, entry into a commercial establishment during regular business hours with the intent to commit theft by some other means, such as the intent to commit theft by false pretenses, would not qualify for relief under … Although defendant admitted in his factual bases only the intent to commit a felony, his second degree burglary convictions clearly meet the requirement of misdemeanor shoplifting that defendant enter “a commercial establishment

Woodside Homes of California, Inc. v. Superior Court

132 Cal. Rptr. 2d 35 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 28, 2003

The crucial term, “unconscionable,” is not defined, but the law has clearly established that the term has both a procedural and a substantive element. … In our view the department’s authority to micromanage the preparation of sales contracts through regulation is not clearly established, especially in an area of law rapidly evolving both through legislation and judicial decisions

Keller v. Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co.

2 Cal. App. 2d 513 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 1, 1934

App. 754 [ 296 Pac. 108, 109 ], as follows, “It is the established rule that one who relies upon the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur to establish a cause based upon negligence, must allege merely general acts of negligence. … Clearly this instruction was inapplicable to the facts of the case, and should not have been given.

Payne v. Callahan

37 Cal. App. 2d 503 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 28, 1940

It was suggested in 27 California Law Review, 192, that the landowner might be held to have a qualified ownership in the subsurface oil. … As it is in conflict with the rule of property established in Callahan v.

Hamburg v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

10 Cal. Rptr. 3d 568 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 3, 2004

On February 17, 2000, one Richard Johnson was arrested while on Wal-Mart property collecting signatures to qualify a voter initiative, known as Measure G, to decriminalize the personal use of marijuana. … Local print and broadcast media reports stated or suggested that Wal-Mart caused Johnson to be arrested because it opposed his efforts to qualify Measure G for the ballot.

Mihlon v. Superior Court

169 Cal. App. 3d 703 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 25, 1985

, in their official capacities, are acts exclusively of {qua) the corporation, and are thus not material for purposes of establishing minimum contacts as to individuals. … The Ruger discussion clearly suggests the view that an employee would be subject to individual jurisdiction if his actions had had a sufficient nexus to the cause of action alleged. In Davis v.

PCO, Inc. v. Christensen, Miller, Fink, Jacobs, Glaser, Weil & Shapiro

58 Cal. Rptr. 3d 516 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 30, 2007

Moreover, any separate practice by Shapiro while he also was a partner in the Christensen Firm would not necessarily immunize the Christensen Firm from liability. “ ‘ “[WJhere the employee is combining his own business with … Based on the evidence, we cannot say as a matter of law that it clearly appears that Shapiro was not directly or indirectly serving the Christensen Firm.

Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family Services v. T.K.

174 Cal. App. 4th 1426 · California Court of Appeal · May 18, 2009

for or address the change in the statutory scheme, which provides for the exercise of jurisdiction based on prior harm. *1437 Second, the value of the oft-quoted language in Rocco M. is further diminished because it is clearly … In neither case did the incidents or harms alleged qualify as sufficiently serious to support the exercise of jurisdiction irrespective of any lack of showing of fhture or current risk.

Portola Hills Community Assn. v. James

4 Cal. App. 4th 289 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 24, 1992

With that established, the question becomes whether the ban against a satellite dish that cannot be seen promotes any legitimate goal of the association. It clearly does not. … A dish that cannot be seen by anyone else would not even appear to qualify as an exterior structure under the association’s own rules.

Turner v. Smith CA1/2

California Court of Appeal · Apr 26, 2023

In Barro, the defendant’s prior conviction for mayhem, which had been dismissed under Penal Code section 1385, could not qualify as a strike under the Three Strikes law. (Id. at p. 64.) … It is well-established that the fact that Turner’s state law claims were preserved for state court litigation means that defendants cannot prevail on an argument that the claims are barred in state court by the doctrine of

Singh v. Prasifka CA2/7

California Court of Appeal · Oct 22, 2021

The Medical Board challenges only the second element of the four elements Singh must allege to establish the Medical Board violated Title II and the Rehabilitation Act, i.e., that he is “otherwise qualified” to receive a … But “statutes are no more immune to judicial scrutiny for ADA compliance than are rules or regulations.” (Fry, supra, 98 Cal.App.4th at p. 264.)

Kumelauskas v. Cozzi

173 Cal. App. 2d 541 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 3, 1959

The rule is established that if a person whose claimed negligence is in issue is unable to testify by reason of loss of memory, the fact that other witnesses for the parties testify fully as to the accident and conduct of … The giving of the instructions without qualification was clearly error.

Grahn v. Tosco Corp.

58 Cal. App. 4th 1373 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 4, 1997

First, Grahn contended Tosco was negligent in hiring Thorpe to remove asbestos-containing materials without any indication Thorpe was licensed or qualified to engage in such work. … However, the workers’ compensation system clearly recognizes and accommodates the availability of civil remedies for the injured worker as against negligent third parties.

L.B. Research & Education Foundation v. UCLA Foundation

29 Cal. Rptr. 3d 710 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 14, 2005

Research and Education Foundation (a nonprofit public benefit corporation) gave the UCLA Foundation (a fully qualified public charity) a contribution of $1 million to establish an endowed chair, the Julien I. E. … “However, if the donor clearly manifests an intention to make a conditional gift, that intention will be honored. [Citation.]

Alpha Beta, Inc. v. Superior Court

160 Cal. App. 3d 1049 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 16, 1984

It is now well established that these procedures are compulsory, and exclusive of judicial proceedings, in any dispute subject to the RLA. (Andrews v. Louisville & Nashville R. … We conclude that the preemption doctrine as stated in Garmon and qualified in Farmer does not bar state-court action under the circumstances of the record before us.

Jewish Defense Organization, Inc. v. Superior Court

85 Cal. Rptr. 2d 611 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 8, 1999

At one end of the spectrum are situations where a defendant clearly does business over the Internet. … That would not comport with traditional notions of what qualifies as purposeful activity invoking the benefits and protections of the forum state.”

People v. Uribe

162 Cal. App. 4th 1457 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 24, 2008

The trial court qualified her as an expert in the field of child sexual assault and the examination of children alleged to have been sexual assault victims. … It was clearly spearheaded by the police, who advised Ritter of a report of alleged sexual abuse in which Anna was the victim.