Case law

People v. Hatfield

273 Cal. App. 2d 745 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 6, 1969

In People v. … J., and Brown (H. C.), J., concurred. Appellants’ petition for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied July 30, 1969.

People v. Shults

151 Cal. App. 3d 714 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 8, 1984

the results of an Administrative Fair Hearing Board can be used by the defendant as evidence . . . .” … (Padfield, supra, at p. 227 , quoting People v. Brown (1971) 18 Cal.App.3d 1052, 1055 [ 96 Cal.Rptr. 476 ].) Defendant’s in limine motion addressed a purely evidentiary question.

Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. Llewellyn Iron Works

42 Cal. App. 766 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 19, 1919

Co. v. McDonald, 112 Ala. 216 , [ 20 South. 472 ]; Brown v. Louisville etc. R. Co., 111 Ala. 275 , [ 19 South. 1001 ]; Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Plunkett, 25 Kan. 188 .) … Not even was the presence of the board in the hatchway investigated; nor was the board removed. [6] Notwithstanding the fact that other men than deceased were actually working in this very hatchway at the time, to defendant

Peters v. Peters

16 Cal. App. 2d 383 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 1, 1936

Co. v. Welch, 202 Cal. 312 [ 260 Pac. 545 ].) The effect of the code section and the doctrine of the foregoing cases appears, however, to be limited by the cases of Brown v. Brown, 170 Cal. 1 [ 147 Pac. 1168 ], Brown v. … In the case of Brown v. Brown, supra, at page 5, the court says: “It is earnestly contended by the respondent that the final decree is of no force whatever upon the right of the plaintiff in the property of the husband.

Owens v. Foundation for Ocean Research

107 Cal. App. 3d 179 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 19, 1980

Opinion BROWN (Gerald), P. J. Vernon S. … After being assured by FOR’s attorney the agreement had been reduced to writing and adopted in resolution form by the corporation’s board of directors, Owens contacted Watt Industries as a potential buyer of Rancho Zorro.

People v. McLeod

210 Cal. App. 3d 585 · California Court of Appeal · May 15, 1989

Appellant relies primarily on our decision in People v. Brown (1986) 179 Cal.App.3d 207, 215-216 [ 224 Cal.Rptr. 476 ], and on People v. … . *590 (Nix v. Whiteside, supra, 475 U.S. at pp. 166-175 [89 L.Ed.2d at pp. 134-135]; cf. People v. Brown, supra, 179 Cal.App.3d at p. 216 ).

Garner v. American Mutual Liability Insurance

31 Cal. App. 3d 843 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 24, 1973

(See, e.g., Brown v. Guarantee Ins. … (See, e.g., Kenney v. Superior Court (1967) 255 Cal.App.2d 106, 114 [ 63 Cal.Rptr. 84 ]; Brown v. Superior Court (1963) 218 Cal.App.2d 430, 434-435 [ 32 Cal.Rptr. 527 ].) But the evaluation included more.

Boehm v. Superior Court

178 Cal. App. 3d 494 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 5, 1986

Pursuant to a needs study presented by the Department of Human Resources to the Board of Supervisors on February 15, 1985, the Board *498 unanimously found that $185 per month would meet the subsistence needs of General Relief … Brown (G. A.), P. J., and Woolpert, J., concurred. A petition for a rehearing was denied April 4, 1986, and the judgment was modified to read as printed above.

Konou v. Wilson

211 Cal. App. 4th 1284 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 13, 2012

(Perry v. Brown, at p. 1082, fn. 14.) … (Perry v. Brown, at pp. 1086-1095.)

People v. Case

77 Cal. App. 477 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 15, 1926

The intruders were the defendants Brown, Nelson, and Case. Each of the defendants Brown and Nelson was armed with a “gun.” … This question was recently considered by this court in People v. Snyder, 74 Cal. App. 138 [ 239 Pac. 705 ].

Robert Half Int'l, Inc. v. Franchise Tax Bd.

78 Cal. Rptr. 2d 453 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 16, 1998

In Phillips Petroleum v. … Laurel Pipe Line Co. v. Com. (1994) 537 Pa. 205 [ 642 A.2d 472, 475 ] [nonbusiness income] with Texaco-Cities Service Pipeline v.

Mullins v. Cal. Horse Racing Board CA4/1

California Court of Appeal · Mar 18, 2014

Filed 3/18/14 Mullins v. Cal. … Perhaps this is so because Mullins argued to the trial court that state immunity statutes cannot immunize the Board against his federal claims. (See, e.g., Martinez v.

Merry v. Coast Community College District

97 Cal. App. 3d 214 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 25, 1979

Horvath, 16 Cal.3d 834, 837 [ 129 Cal.Rptr. 453 , 548 P.2d 1125 ]; Brown v. … (Hodge v. Mountain States Tel. & Tel. Co. (9th Cir. 1977) 555 F.2d 254 ; Toensing v. Brown (9th Cir. 1975) 528 F.2d 69, 72 ; Walling v. Beverly Enterprises (9th Cir. 1973) 476 F.2d 393 ; Sunbeam Lighting Co. v.

Kime v. Dignity Health, Inc.

California Court of Appeal · Apr 25, 2024

(Hay v. … Brown, Debra J. Albin-Riley, Annie C. Lee, M.H. Joshua Chiu for California Hospital Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Respondent A166748, Kime v.

Epstein v. Superior Court

193 Cal. App. 4th 1405 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 30, 2011

Board of Civil Service Commissioners (1969) 1 Cal.3d 351 , 362 [ 82 Cal.Rptr. 337 , 461 P.2d 617 ]; see 8 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (5th ed. 2008) Extraordinary Writs, § 202, p. 1106.) … (See National Assn, of Wine Bottlers v.

In Re Marriage of Corriveau

183 Cal. App. 3d 1012 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 29, 1986

(City of Los Angeles v. Industrial Acc. Com. … (See § 190.06; Lyons v. Workmen’s Comp. Appeals Bd., supra, 44 Cal.App.3d at p. 1014 ; Wesley v.

People v. BRAC

73 Cal. App. 2d 629 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 25, 1946

Tony went into the drug store and in a few minutes emerged with a small brown paper bag, which he handed to Raymond. The officers thereupon recovered the brown paper bag from *633 Raymond. … In People v.

Spillane v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Bd.

269 Cal. App. 2d 346 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 31, 1969

compensation (Gre ydamus v. … Com., 63 Cal.2d 490, 493 [ 47 Cal.Rptr. 384 , 407 P.2d 296 ]), and that a finding of the board must be supported by substantial evidence. (See Berry v. Workmen’s Comp. App.

Chico Police Officers' Ass'n v. City of Chico

232 Cal. App. 3d 635 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 25, 1991

Keyishian v. Board of Regents, 385 U.S. 589 , 87 *643 S.Ct. 675, 17 L.Ed.2d 629 (1967); Garrity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493 , 87 S.Ct. 616 , 17 L.Ed.2d 562 (1967).” (Hanneman v. … (Kannisto v.

City of Turlock v. Vrenios

200 Cal. App. 2d 404 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 16, 1962

Code, section 1090, which provided: “Members of the Legislature, state, county, judicial district, and city officers shall not be interested in any contract made by them in their official capacity, or by any *406 body or board … J., and Brown, J., concurred.