Case law

In Re Marriage of Stephens

156 Cal. App. 3d 909 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 4, 1984

Husband’s interpretation is clearly supported by the language of the statute. … The reasonableness of the cost charged by such a person would presumably be established by the competitive market.

People v. Williams

164 Cal. App. 2d 285 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 16, 1958

That the evidence is sufficient to sustain the verdict is clearly apparent from the record. … It may be directed to the eliciting of any matter which may tend to overcome or qualify the effect of the testimony given by him on his direct examination. ...

Blinder v. Division of Narcotic Enforcement

25 Cal. App. 3d 174 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 26, 1972

Methadone treatment by qualified physicians allows the patient-addict to enjoy a productive social role, free of criminal behavior.” … It is well established that, in the interest of the general welfare of its inhabitants, a state may establish a program of compulsory treatment for those addicted to narcotics and that such a program may include periods of

Keller v. Gerber

49 Cal. App. 515 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 9, 1920

M. of each "day in the year, except Sundays and holidays, there shall be present at least one person qualified and prepared to transact the business that may properly come into said office. … The ease is one to establish a claim for the reasonable value of services.

Zurich American Insurance v. Superior Court

66 Cal. Rptr. 3d 833 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 11, 2007

Clearly, the fundamental purpose behind the privilege is to safeguard the confidential relationship between clients and their attorneys so as to promote full and open discussion of the facts and tactics surrounding individual … It held that section 47, subdivision (2), the litigation privilege, did not bar their admission to establish bad faith. (White, at p. 888.)

Marler v. Johansing

199 Cal. App. 4th 1450 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 19, 2011

Courts deciding whether to certify that a lawsuit qualifies for a class action must determine which obstacles create insuperable barriers to class relief and which do not. This can be a daunting task, but not here. … Marler said they received offers to purchase lots “within an established price range—from $110,000 to $150,000.”

Dept. of Fair Employment and Housing v. M&N Financing Corp.

California Court of Appeal · Sep 27, 2021

discrimination by such establishments’”].) … Liability for violations of Civil Code sections 51 and 51.5 “extends beyond the business establishment itself to the business establishment’s employees responsible for the discriminatory conduct.”

Reilly v. Inquest Technology, Inc.

218 Cal. App. 4th 536 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 31, 2013

The provision clearly calls for 50 percent of the profits from all sales that are a “result” of Reilly‟s “activities.” … Based on our review of the record, we conclude Reilly presented ample evidence Triconex qualified as a new “contact” deserving of a commission.

Board of Supervisors v. Superior Court

33 Cal. App. 4th 1724 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 14, 1995

We issued the writ to establish the record in this proceeding and heard oral argument. … Secondly, the sheriff is bound by the consent decree with regard to jail operations, an area clearly within his purview.

Estes v. Rowland

14 Cal. App. 4th 508 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 23, 1993

Koehler (S.D.N.Y. 1988) 692 F.Supp. 1519 , the plaintiffs established Eighth Amendment violations at a New York correctional facility. … The evidence clearly supported the trial court’s determination that such time limits were necessary.

Marriage of Kelkar

229 Cal. App. 4th 833 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 10, 2014

That rule, of course, is qualified by the rule that “‘[v]ested rights . . . may be impaired “with due process of law” under many circumstances. … Therefore, Mary has failed to establish the elements of equitable estoppel.

Anaheim Elementary Education Ass'n v. Board of Education

179 Cal. App. 3d 1153 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 16, 1986

Board of Education, supra, 254 Cal.App.2d 660 , stated: “A reading of the statute as a whole, however, clearly indicates that ‘member’ is used in its normally accepted sense and is to be given its ordinary and usual meaning … Much of the act is no more than an unremarkable application of standard collective bargaining concepts well established in other private and public sector contexts to public education employment.”

Thompson Pacific Construction Inc. v. City of Sunnyvale

66 Cal. Rptr. 3d 175 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 21, 2007

Mere negligence and ‘innocent mistake[s]’ are not sufficient to establish liability under the FCA. [Citation.] … All expenses incurred with respect to the [issues common to all causes of action] qualify for award.” (Reynolds Metals Co., at pp. 129-130.)

Donley v. Davi

180 Cal. App. 4th 447 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 2, 2009

Donley objected that this summary did not qualify as a judicial admission because it was prepared by his counsel and not signed by him. … As the trial court aptly explained: “The evidence clearly establishes that there was a break in the conflict when Ms. Riddle left the house.

Nede Mgmt. v. Aspen American Ins. Co.

California Court of Appeal · Oct 5, 2021

According to a letter attached to the complaint, Fields told Barbara and David he believed the policy limits demand was “clearly premature.” … Qualified Patients Assn. v. City of Anaheim (2010) 187 Cal.App.4th 734, 756 [“on the few facts known” about the situation, the court “cannot say” what the right answer is] (Qualified).)

Hernandez v. First Student, Inc.

California Court of Appeal · Jul 10, 2019

“A person is qualified to testify as an expert if he has special knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education sufficient to qualify him as an expert on the subject to which his testimony relates.” (Evid. … Smith was clearly qualified to opine about Detective Tarzia’s DRE evaluation and why he formed the opinion that Calderon was not impaired.

People v. MUSOVICH

42 Cal. Rptr. 3d 62 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 28, 2006

Having been so misinformed, North lacked the actual knowledge of the registration requirements our Supreme Court has held necessary to establish a willful violation of section 290.” … Given these facts, defendant clearly had changed his residence from Upland Drive, triggering a duty to reregister, and he knew of such a duty.

Reid v. Google, Inc.

66 Cal. Rptr. 3d 744 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 4, 2007

Thus the employee must establish: "(1) he was a member of a protected class, (2) he was qualified for the position he sought or was performing competently in the position he held, (3) he suffered an adverse employment action … Statistical evidence is clearly admissible in the present case.

Hernandez v. Superior Court

110 Cal. App. 3d 355 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 17, 1980

If the Blair holding is a straightforward application of existing precedent, no issue of retroactivity arises and Blair clearly controls this case. … These questions cannot be deemed to be settled merely because the general framework for evaluating them has been established.” (People v. Kaanehe (1977) 19 Cal.3d 1, 10, fn. 6 [ 136 Cal.Rptr. 409 , 559 P.2d 1028 ].)

Sonoma County Organization of Public/Private Employees v. County of Sonoma

1 Cal. App. 4th 267 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 25, 1991

The County’s determination that there existed an emergency at the time of the Ordinance’s enactment, although not conclusive or immune from judicial review (Burr v. … The County’s medical facilities are staffed by workers whose “particular jobs . . . require unique skills and training,” and “whose absence from their duties would clearly endanger the public health and safety” (County Sanitation