Case law

Society of California Pioneers v. McElroy

63 Cal. App. 2d 332 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 20, 1944

The will then provides: “I hereby establish the James D. Phelan Foundation, the income of which is to be expended solely for charitable purposes, and in that behalf I give and bequeath to E. D. … The rule is well settled that once the decree of distribution becomes final it becomes the measure of the rights of the beneficiary and is immune from collateral attack even though in contravention of the terms of the will

Waremart v. Progressive Campaigns, Inc.

102 Cal. Rptr. 2d 392 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 14, 2001

hereafter Pruneyard ) and Pruneyard's progeny, the trial court ruled that Waremart, a warehouse-style grocery store, has the right to deny entry to its premises to Progressive and others who seek to solicit signatures to qualify … we were to hold the particular sidewalk area to be `off limits' for the exercise of First Amendment rights in effect we would be saying that by erecting a 'cordon sanitaire' around its store, [the store] has succeeded in immunizing

Marsh v. Mountain Zephyr, Inc.

43 Cal. App. 4th 289 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 6, 1996

In this case the order from which the appeal is taken is clearly collateral to the subject matter of the litigation and is final as to the collateral matter. … Clearly, it is within the trial court’s discretion to determine which “other factors” it will consider.

People v. Wojahn

169 Cal. App. 2d 135 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 26, 1959

Defendant has not pointed out a single instance of anything favorable to him which was not clearly audible or which was omitted from the transcripts. In People v. … Defendant does not complain of it as far as it went but contends that it should have been qualified.

Suarez v. City of Corona

229 Cal. App. 4th 325 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 29, 2014

The City informed Appellants that the evidence did not establish that the City had notice of a dangerous condition. … The City argued there was no dangerous condition, it did not have actual or constructive notice, and design immunity applied.

Consumer Defense Group v. Rental Housing Industry Members

40 Cal. Rptr. 3d 832 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 24, 2006

Another part of the deal was a de facto alliance with Graham & Martin to preserve that immunity. … As the Attorney General noticed, it is an “enterprise that only provides immunity for businesses and remuneration for private attorneys.”

Am. Medical Response of Inland Empire v. County of San Bernardino CA4/1

California Court of Appeal · Dec 18, 2025

The Proposal Review Committee (Committee) will evaluate all proposals based on the evaluation criteria score sheet as established in this RFP. … unless they acted pursuant to ‘ “clearly articulated and affirmatively expressed” ’ state policy.

Thomas J. Palmer, Inc. v. Turkiye is Bankasi A.S.

105 Cal. App. 3d 135 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 25, 1980

Discussion Summary Plaintiffs have the burden of showing the facts establishing jurisdiction. … The inquiry then must be whether Turkish Bank’s causing effects in California in this instance qualifies as a “reasonable” basis for the exercise of jurisdiction because the end result was “subject to special regulation in

Mueller v. J. C. Penney Co.

173 Cal. App. 3d 713 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 23, 1985

To be final for purposes of collateral estoppel, the decision need only be immune, as a practical matter, to reversal or amendment. (See Miller Brewing Co. v. Jos. … general, may lack the reliability of felony convictions because misdemeanor defendants do not as thoroughly litigate their cases. 9 However, on this record there is no reason to indulge in this assumption when the facts clearly

Danger Panda, LLC v. Launiu

10 Cal. App. 5th 502 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 4, 2017

Lawful Occupancy Defendants posit that the fact David cannot be a party to a lease agreement does not preclude him from qualifying as a tenant under the Rent Ordinance because case law establishes that a lawful occupant … Defendants fail to explain how Cobb supports their contention that all lawful occupants of a rental unit qualify as tenants under section 37.2(t).

California State Employees' v. State of Calif.

199 Cal. App. 3d 840 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 22, 1988

“The purpose of this article is to establish standards for the use of personal services contracts. … materials, facilities, or support services that could not feasibly be provided by the state in the location where the services are to be performed. *856 “(9) The contractor will conduct training courses for which appropriately qualified

People v. Keller

165 Cal. App. 2d 419 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 21, 1958

Clearly, the provisions of this section are not applicable to the bank’s document. … Because a man and woman, not legally qualified to be married to each other, go through a void marriage ceremony, cannot make them husband and wife.

Villafana v. County of Los Angeles CA2/4

California Court of Appeal · Mar 4, 2014

Accordingly, Villafana failed to establish a prima facie case for disability discrimination. … Governmental Immunity County argues it is immune from FEHA and federal civil rights law liability for releasing Villafana from employment pursuant to sections 815.2 and 820.2.

Chicken Delight of California, Inc. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

35 Cal. App. 3d 841 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 7, 1973

Clearly, however, this situation is the very one which was distinguished in State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Allstate Ins. … To hold otherwise is to completely erase from the policy the qualifying phrase “against the insured,” contained in Clause II (a) . . . .’ Also, as stated in Travelers Ins. Co v. Tymkow, 87 N.J.

People Ex Rel. Dept. Pub. Wks. v. HOME TRUST INV.

8 Cal. App. 3d 1022 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 23, 1970

Appellants cite no authority for their position. (2) Section 1248 of the Code of Civil Procedure implies and California cases have established that the proper valuation date is the date of the commencement of the action. … Proc., § 1248), and since the state offered to mitigate any damages resulting from delay in construction of the freeway, appellants have clearly failed to show any injustice. (Cf. People v.

Laker v. Bd. of Trustees of the Cal. State Univ.

California Court of Appeal · Feb 28, 2019

Furthermore, that exception generally relates to immunity under antitrust and unfair competition law and therefore has no application here. (BE & K Construction Co. v. … They also argue that Laker’s defamation claim is time-barred, lacks sufficient particularity, fails to allege any special damages, and that McVey is immune under Government Code section 822.2.

Brant v. Retirement Board of San Francisco

57 Cal. App. 2d 721 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 22, 1943

The Retirement Board of San Francisco, on which there are seven qualified members, by a vote of three to two (two members being absent) denied the application of respondent Josephine Brant for a pension. … Kilgore, which will later be discussed, is so clearly not susceptible of the interpretation given to it by appellants that it need not be discussed.

Oiye v. Fox

211 Cal. App. 4th 1036 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 11, 2012

Fox Qualified Personal Residence Trust. The attorney declared that this transfer occurred shortly after defendant was arrested on the criminal charges. … The government clearly has a substantial interest in preventing this sort of abuse of its processes.” (Ibid.)

Humane Society of the United States v. State Board of Equalization

61 Cal. Rptr. 3d 277 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 21, 2007

Thereafter, definitions are provided for the terms “ ‘[qualified person’ ” and “ ‘[f]arm equipment and. machinery.’ ” (§ 6356.5, subd. (b)(1), (2).) … The Brown court then examined the legislative background of the DTPAF program and determined that it did not “establish a continuous appropriation.” (Brown, supra, 30 Cal.App.4th at p. 1283 .)

Property Reserve v. Super. Ct.

California Court of Appeal · Mar 13, 2014

The government also established a fire control station there. … (Recommendation Relating to Sovereign Immunity (Sept. 1969) 9 Cal. Law Revision Com.