Case law

Perlman v. Municipal Court

99 Cal. App. 3d 568 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 11, 1979

However, the ordinances are clearly distinguishable. … The constitutionality of the ordinance is well established by California authority through Gospel Army v.

FLIR Systems, Inc. v. Parrish

174 Cal. App. 4th 1270 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 15, 2009

Objective speciousness was established by evidence that appellants had an anticompetitive motive in filing the lawsuit. … If the rule were otherwise, a trade secrets plaintiff could file sham declarations to successfully oppose a summary judgment motion and immunize itself from sanctions.

See's Candies, Inc. v. Super. Ct.

California Court of Appeal · Dec 21, 2021

The court asked whether a rule of civil immunity for fetal injuries would have to be “coupled with a provision” allowing payments to parents and children not currently permitted. (Id. at p. 1005.) … If, as defendants posit, the Snyder court intended to apply the derivative injury doctrine to any injury allegedly caused by an employee injury, Salin clearly would meet that test.

Phelps v. Orange County Assessment Appeals Board No. 1

187 Cal. App. 4th 653 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 16, 2010

Although the lease was silent *660 on the issue, the evidence established that the retailer paid rent for the land, not the building on it. … Accordingly, Reilly concluded that “[t]he receipt of income generated by property qualifies as a ‘beneficial use’ of the property . . . .”

CRYSTAL R. v. Superior Court of Santa Cruz County

59 Cal. App. 4th 703 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 26, 1997

The Kansas Supreme Court acknowledged that the proceeding qualified under the definitions contained in the Act as a child custody proceeding involving an Indian child. … The Indian father barely knows his daughter and has only recently established contact with his tribe.

Department of Health Care Services v. Office of Administrative Hearings

6 Cal. App. 5th 120 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 29, 2016

namely a declaration establishing the Educational Agencies‟ duty to provide awarded OT and PT in this matter. … ‟s mother‟s testimony established L.M. suffered some regression in her fine motor skills.

Gregory v. State Board of Control

73 Cal. App. 4th 584 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 13, 1999

In cases in which the applicant or his or her representative are unable or decline to obtain such crime report, [the Board] or qualifying victim witness centers under contract to the board shall obtain the crime report. … “Thus, the award will be reversed only if it is clearly wrong or has no reasonable basis.” {Ibid.) We cannot say there was any abuse of discretion here.

Jeff Tracy, Inc. v. City of Pico Rivera CA2/2

240 Cal. App. 4th 510 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 18, 2015

In most cases, a contractor can establish valid licensure by simply producing “a verified certificate of licensure from the Contractors’ State License Board which establishes that the individual or entity bringing the action … (c)(3) [corporation qualifies for contractor’s license “upon the appearance of a qualifying individual appearing either as a responsible managing officer or a responsible managing employee on behalf of the corporation”].)

Berg & Berg Enterprises v. City of San Jose CA6

California Court of Appeal · Dec 18, 2015

that City is not immune because Berg & Berg’s claims are based on contract. … Standard of Review “The authority of a trial court in this state to grant a new trial is established and circumscribed by statute. [Citation.]

City of Oxnard v. Starr

California Court of Appeal · Feb 17, 2023

Of course, the rules established by initiative must be reasonable. … Government Code section 36813 establishes no specific rules for the conduct of City council proceedings. Instead, it leaves it to each municipality to establish its own rules.

Guardianship of Levy

137 Cal. App. 2d 237 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 25, 1955

In the case sul judice, the court was clearly imposed upon by Mrs. Stogsdill both in her petition and in her testimony at the ex parte application. … This argument is clearly untenable.

Walker v. Walker

138 Cal. App. 4th 1408 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 27, 2006

However, evidence that a qualifying phrase is intended to apply to all antecedents, not only the immediately preceding one, may be found when a comma separates the antecedents and the qualifying phrase. … When a judgment clearly establishes the appellant’s right to recover, but the amount is less than she sought, she may accept the judgment and nevertheless appeal to claim the larger recovery.

People v. Santana

134 Cal. App. 3d 773 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 25, 1982

While probation reports are clearly hearsay, they have their proper place in sentencing proceedings as an aid to the court.... … Of course district attorneys’ files would not qualify under section 1280, although the data contained in the files may very well have come from a source which could qualify under this hearsay exception.

Comstock v. Aber

212 Cal. App. 4th 931 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 18, 2012

Both statutes mandate reports to the government; both provide immunity for reporters. … It did not establish that he was acting on a matter of public interest. (Id. at pp. 1132, 1134.)

McClure v. Board of Education

38 Cal. App. 500 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 24, 1918

Said Civic Center Act provides: “There is hereby established a civic center at each and every public sehoolhouse within the state of California, where the citizens of the respective public school districts . . . may engage … Thus, it is claimed, has the board clearly transgressed, and will continue to transgress, this statutory limitation upon its authority.

Cornelius v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority

49 Cal. App. 4th 1761 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 17, 1996

The issue of what type of tax the plaintiff must pay in order to have standing under Code of Civil Procedure section 526a has never been clearly resolved. … That element is clearly lacking here.

People v. Diaz CA2/6

California Court of Appeal · Jun 21, 2021

After he consulted with an attorney, the court granted him immunity. … The law presumes that every person is qualified to be a witness. (Evid. Code, § 700.)

Spotlight On Coastal Corruption v. Kinsey

California Court of Appeal · Dec 15, 2020

To uphold the ruling conferring public interest standing, Spotlight claims the trial court “clearly found—as a matter of fact—that [the Complaint] was sufficient to seek a writ of mandate, which finding is clearly supported … This court considered the interaction between government immunity “for any injury caused in fighting fires” in Government Code section 850.4 and an exception to that immunity in Vehicle Code section 17001 for injuries caused

B.B. v. County of Los Angeles

California Court of Appeal · Jul 11, 2018

The jury was properly instructed with respect to noneconomic damages, and nothing in the record clearly establishes the jury relied upon improper considerations. … A “result which requires reversal should clearly appear from the record.

People v. Anderson

236 Cal. App. 2d 419 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 9, 1965

It is essentially a denial qualified with a repeated “I don’t remember.” … However, as to the second count with which defendant was charged, namely, the possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, the statement is clearly a confession.