Case law

Estate of Buckley

132 Cal. App. 3d 434 · California Court of Appeal · May 28, 1982

Mullane established that published notice is violative of due process as to known beneficiaries whose whereabouts are also known. … Clearly, the foregoing statement contained in the petition to vacate orders does not amount to an admission that respondent Doyle Bibb is not qualified to act as executor or that respondent Bibb has any interest or bias which

Amar v. Schuller CA2/1

California Court of Appeal · Jun 24, 2014

This includes qualifying acts committed by attorneys in representing clients in litigation. [Citation.].” (Rusheen v. Cohen (2006) 37 Cal.4th 1048, 1056.) … Amar may not immunize his causes of action “by the artifice of including extraneous allegations concerning nonprotected activity.” (Scott v. Metabolife Internat., Inc., supra, 115 Cal.App.4th at p. 414.)

People v. Jacaline CA6

California Court of Appeal · Feb 23, 2015

Chavez was a civil action involving qualified immunity. 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. … The Ninth Circuit upheld the denial of qualified immunity to the parole officer, concluding that the “ ‘right to be free from coercive interrogation’ ” was clearly established under both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments

Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish & Wildlife

234 Cal. App. 4th 214 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 10, 2015

The EIR 18 concludes this population is clearly experiencing a significant impact. … A third rejected alternative was to establish permanent stocking closures.

People v. Aquilante

208 Cal. App. 2d 530 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 15, 1962

The equally well recognized exceptions to this rule are clearly defined. … In a later and somewhat qualifying statement of the rule, the California Supreme Court declared that, “If such evidence is determined to be relevant to prove a material fact in issue, it is for the trial court in the exercise

Munoz v. City of Union City

16 Cal. Rptr. 3d 521 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 17, 2004

However, the Supreme Court clearly did not adopt the view that because all entities, public and private, must act through individuals, that suffices to establish direct liability. … The federal causes of action were held to be barred by the officers’ qualified immunity, because the use of deadly force was reasonable. (Martinez, supra, 47 Cal.App.4th at p. 344 .)

People v. Romero

204 Cal. App. 4th 704 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 27, 2012

Defendant “points to no evidence in the record that would establish systematic exclusion.” … Defendant also claims that superior court judges reject statutorily qualified individuals for unauthorized reasons.

McCann v. City of San Diego

California Court of Appeal · Oct 8, 2021

‘Relevant personal observations of area residents on nontechnical subjects may qualify as substantial evidence . . . . [Citations.] … As it relates to CEQA, the Climate Action Plan states the plan “will serve as a Qualified GHG Reduction Plan for purposes of tiering under CEQA.”

Juran v. Epstein

23 Cal. App. 4th 882 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 24, 1994

The letter clearly states Charlotte “hopes” David would abide by her wishes. … Equally important, David ignores the well-settled principle that courts should not presume the Legislature intended “to overthrow long-established principles of law unless such intention is made clearly to appear either by

Aguilar v. Johnson

202 Cal. App. 3d 241 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 17, 1988

Clearly, this section allows the Chief to delay investigation where the facts of an individual case indicate this is the more prudent course. … The *252 claim is clearly without merit.

Mitchell v. Exhibition Foods, Inc.

184 Cal. App. 3d 1033 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 26, 1986

I trust. . . that the offer would be established as being a bona fide one. … The balance of burdens as opposed to rewards clearly inures to defendants’ advantage. The provision, by providing for their security of tenure, is clearly intended to be for the benefit and protection of defendants.

Conn v. National Can Corporation

124 Cal. App. 3d 630 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 16, 1981

The employer urged the trial court to agree with the idea that the responding party to the motion “must establish a triable issue of fact ... … “A moving defendant must show clearly that plaintiff’s áction has no merit.

Jones v. Quality Coast

California Court of Appeal · Mar 23, 2021

“To qualify as an exempt executive, administrative or professional employee . . . , an employee must be compensated on a salary basis . . . .” (29 C.F.R. § 541.600(a).) … Code of Civil Procedure, a prevailing defendant shall not be awarded fees and costs unless the court finds the action was frivolous, unreasonable, or groundless when brought, or the plaintiff continued to litigate after it clearly

People v. Jones

105 Cal. App. 3d 572 · California Court of Appeal · May 9, 1980

.) *582 Unlike the federal rule, in California the prosecution bears the burden of establishing beyond a reasonable doubt, that a confession was voluntary and not the result of any promise of leniency or reward. … Officer Duff qualified his request by making it clear that they (the police) were interested in only the truth.

People v. Corban

138 Cal. App. 4th 1111 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 21, 2006

The court rejected his argument that Vehicle Code statutes established a specific sentencing scheme for his offense that precluded imposition of the enhancement. … The court found that the Legislature “clearly intended Penal Code section 12022.7 to have broad application” (Sainz, supra, at p. 573 ), observed that certain crimes were expressly excluded from section 12022.7 (§ 12022.7

Panoche Energy Center, LLC v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.

1 Cal. App. 5th 68 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 1, 2016

Compensation was not guaranteed by the establishment of these criteria, and no final resolution of the issue of stranded GHG costs was achieved. … Clearly, the arbitrators believed the risk of exposure to AB 32 compliance costs was known to and taken into account by Panoche when it entered the PPA in March 2006.

Marriage of Runge CA3

California Court of Appeal · Jan 6, 2016

Therefore, according to father, “[i]t is difficult to imagine a less qualified and fit individual for custody than” mother. … The child was up to date on his immunizations. She testified that she kept father informed about the child’s medical appointments, and consulted him about immunizations.

Scates v. Rydingsword

229 Cal. App. 3d 1085 · California Court of Appeal · May 1, 1991

Emergency-assistance funding for the hotline referrals, for example, was intended to be discretionary only, and we have already noted that the program was clearly not intended to be a part of GA. … Immediate Need benefits may be provided on the same day of application to those who qualify for immediate need.

Ron Yates Construction Co. v. Superior Court

186 Cal. App. 3d 337 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 9, 1986

“It is well-established that a regulation cannot restrict or enlarge the scope of a statute. California Government Code sections 11373, 11374; see, also, 55 Ops. Cal. Atty. … 201 [ 51 Cal.Rptr. 403 ]: “It must be remembered that the doctrine of ejusdem generis ‘is only a rule of construction, to be applied as an aid in ascertaining the legislative intent, and that it does not control where it clearly

Nunes Turfgrass, Inc. v. County of Kern

111 Cal. App. 3d 855 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 6, 1980

We believe clearly established rules of constitutional interpretation require that a term used in a constitutional amendment must be construed according to the meaning it had when the amendment was adopted. … Moreover, if this were a prong of the test, turf grass might qualify in light of its intangible nature during maturation.