Case law

Dowhal v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CONSUMER

122 Cal. Rptr. 2d 246 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 23, 2002

Proposition 65 comes within this exception and is apparently the only state initiative to qualify. [3] There is no doubt that this saving clause permits California, when acting pursuant to Proposition 65, to require label … While smoking has clearly been associated with fetal harm, the contribution of nicotine has not been clearly delineated.... [¶] ... [¶] ...

People v. Stamps

California Court of Appeal · Apr 9, 2019

The policy applies retroactively to all persons who meet the qualifying criteria and are serving a prison sentence for one of those convictions, whether the conviction was by trial or plea. … The court’s acceptance of the negotiated sentence, however, does not clearly establish that the court would not have exercised discretion to strike the enhancement if it had that discretion.

People ex rel. Lockyer v. Fremont Life Insurance

104 Cal. App. 4th 508 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 18, 2002

Those activities included giving of advice and the suggestions that the salespersons were able to give highly qualified expert advice and were giving such expert advice. … Appellant states respondent failed to establish that “each consumer” was actually harmed.

Henderson v. Superior Court

77 Cal. App. 3d 583 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 15, 1978

Sometime in 1975 plaintiff qualified as a professional horse trainer and began to train race horses. … Under the facts established at bench, California has no general jurisdiction over defendant.

People v. Guerra CA4/1

California Court of Appeal · Apr 20, 2016

However, the People in their briefing in both the trial court and this court have clearly asserted the amounts of the losses. … Having determined that entry into a commercial establishment during regular business hours, with the intent to commit theft qualifies as shoplifting where the amount taken or intended is less than $950, we will remand

Central Coast Forest Assn. v. Fish & Game Com.

California Court of Appeal · Jan 5, 2018

The Supreme Court disagreed, holding that a delisting petition may be based on new evidence that challenges an earlier listing decision by showing that the listed species does not qualify for listing. … This finding has important legal, conservation, and management implications [citation] in establishing coho as a native species.”

People v. Vournazos

198 Cal. App. 3d 948 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 19, 1988

Neither the statement nor the testimony of the probation officer established that the sum claimed by Wright for loss of property was based on the replacement cost of the property. … Hartley, supra, 163 Cal.App.3d 126, 130 ), defendant here was not required to meet that burden inasmuch as the replacement or repair cost of Wright’s property was not established.

Estate of Wynne

239 Cal. App. 2d 369 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 13, 1966

Wynne died on the 23d day of November 1962, in Kern County, that the will and the two codicils had been admitted to probate, and that letters testamentary were issued to Bennett Siemon, the qualified and acting executor of … In other words, the evidence must establish that the will itself was a product of the delusion in order to warrant a setting aside of a will.

People v. Felix

169 Cal. App. 4th 607 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 16, 2008

alleged pattern or practice of conduct that was alleged to deprive patients of Metropolitan State Hospital, in Norwalk, California, and Napa State Hospital, in Napa, California [State Hospitals] of rights, privileges, and immunities … The consent judgment in no way compels the People to provide a non-NOS psychiatric diagnosis before it can establish that a respondent is an SVP. *618 IV.

Barrett-Hicks Co. v. Glas

14 Cal. App. 289 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 26, 1910

It seems to us plain that the point we are considering here comes clearly within the principle laid down in the foregoing case. *300 2. … here in controversy, the judgment of reversal as to these later claims in no manner affected or disturbed the said other portions of the findings and decree, and that they were, therefore, affirmed, and that they now stand immune

People v. Vega-Robles

California Court of Appeal · May 7, 2015

The burden is on the party seeking bifurcation to clearly establish there is a substantial danger of prejudice requiring the charges be separately tried. (Id. at p. 1050.) … While the foregoing sentence appears to be categorical, in context it was clearly meant to summarize the evidence adduced at Price’s trial.

Guan v. Hu

California Court of Appeal · Jun 2, 2017

Similarly, Black’s Law Dictionary defines “entitle” as “to . . . qualify for” and an “entitlement” as “[a]n absolute right to a . . . benefit . . . granted immediately upon meeting a legal requirement.” … The trial court’s interpretation of section 1692 is inconsistent with established judicial policy.

Adventure Church v. City of Fresno CA5

California Court of Appeal · Jul 19, 2024

The trial court also addressed the city’s contention that it was immune from suit under Government Code section 815. … The issues in this litigation clearly were under consideration in legitimate official proceedings. The church does not contend otherwise.

San Diego County Department of Social Services v. Neal

190 Cal. App. 3d 685 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 24, 1987

The Legislature clearly contemplated circumstances where the LPS conservatee's family or friends would act as primary care providers. … In addition, Neal clearly was not subject to the risk of involuntary commitment as a result of establishing a private conservatorship administered by his longtime friend and common law wife. Dr.

People v. Hisquierdo

45 Cal. App. 3d 397 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 7, 1975

The Supreme Court pointed out that a defendant has an absolute right to appointed counsel, but that the right to discharge him and substitute. another is qualified, subject to the discretion of the trial court; and the trial … Therefore, under the established rules for testing the need of a sua sponte instruction, the court was under no duty to do so here. (People v.

Aptos Residents Assoc. v. County of Santa Cruz

California Court of Appeal · Feb 27, 2018

Since the exemption repeatedly uses the plural and expressly refers to “limited numbers” of “small structures,” it is clearly not limited to a single small structure. … “A party invoking the exception may establish an unusual circumstance without evidence of an environmental effect, by showing that the project has some feature that distinguishes it from others in the exempt class, such as

Nevada National Bank of San Francisco v. Board of Supervisors

5 Cal. App. 638 · California Court of Appeal · May 28, 1907

It seems to be established by the authorities that the proper course to pursue when municipalities refuse to pay their bonds is by an action at law to establish the validity of the bonds and the amount due thereon, and then … All property in this state shall be taxed in proportion to its value, to be ascertained as directed by law; hut assessors and collectors of town, county and state taxes shall he elected hy the qualified *649 electors of the

De Paolo v. Rosales

California Court of Appeal · Jan 27, 2026

“The parties’ agreement clearly stated that Defendant Rosales’ occupancy was dependent upon the continuation of the employer-employee relationship and that when the 6 employer-employee … In order to qualify as a tenancy within the meaning of the TPA, the occupant’s occupation of the premises must be lawful. (Civ. Code § 1946.2, subd. (k)(3).)

People v. First Federal Credit Corp.

104 Cal. App. 4th 721 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 20, 2002

intended to require evidence of a defendant’s financial status to be presented by the People as a prerequisite to the imposition of civil penalties under sections 17206 and 17536, it would not have included the specific qualifying … This is clearly such a case.

People v. Grant CA4/2

California Court of Appeal · Apr 5, 2016

On the forgery conviction, defendant argued “Proposition 47 clearly gave relief on the 470 class of crimes, and there’s no suggestion that the loss was over $950, so he should receive relief on all counts.” … In such cases the prosecution has the burden of establishing enhancements apply. (People v.