Case law

People v. Myles

California Court of Appeal · Sep 29, 2021

People v. … Sheets of particle board were placed around the table, held in place with two-by-four inch boards and screws. That night, Sergeants Michael Foster and Brock interviewed defendant7 at the Oakland Police Department.

Terminal Plaza Corp. v. City & County of San Francisco

186 Cal. App. 3d 814 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 1, 1986

(Rich v. State Board of Optometry (1965) 235 Cal.App.2d 591 , 604 . . .; Moyer v. Workmen’s Comp. Appeals Bd., supra, 10 Cal.3d at p. 230 .) … (People v. Knowles, supra, 35 Cal.2d, at p. 183 ; Rich v. State Board of Optometry, supra, 235 Cal.App.2d, at p. 604 .)” (California Teachers Assn. v.

Estate of Perl

110 Cal. App. 2d 8 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 25, 1952

Brown, Attorney General, and Elizabeth Palmer, Deputy Attorney General, for Respondent. WOOD (Fred B.), J. … Board of County Com'rs of Clark County, 64 S.D. 417 [ 267 N.W. 138 ], a fixed rate per mile for the use of the officer's own car; Taxpayers' League of Carbon County, Wyo. v.

Myers v. California State Board of Equalization CA2/3

California Court of Appeal · Apr 24, 2023

Filed 4/24/23 Myers v. … Co. v.

People v. Hale

82 Cal. App. 2d 827 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 11, 1947

The attorney general discusses the following authorities on the point: People v. Lee Chuck, 78 Cal. 317 [ 20 P. 719 ] ; People v. Grider, 13 Cal.App. 703 . [ 110 P. 586 ]; People v. … Brown, 81 Cal.App. 226 . [ 253 P. 735 ]; People v. Edgar, 34 Cal.App. 459, 467 [ 167 P. 891 ]; People v. Schmidt, 33 Cal.App. 426, 439 [ 165 P. 555 ] ; and also quotes from 8 Cal.Jur., p. 264, refers to People v.

Rush v. State Teachers' Retirement System

California Court of Appeal · Mar 18, 2021

Proc., §§ 1085, 1094.5) to reverse the board’s decision. … (Betts v. Board of Administration (1978) 21 Cal.3d 859, 863.) “Such a pension right may not be destroyed, once vested, without impairing a contractual obligation of the employing public entity.” (Ibid.)

People v. Stender

47 Cal. App. 3d 413 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 8, 1975

(People v. Brown, 11 Cal.3d 784, 787 [ 114 Cal.Rptr. 426 , 523 P.2d 226 ]; People v. Stanworth, 11 Cal.3d 588, 596, 598-601 [ 114 Cal.Rptr. 250 , 522 P.2d 1058 ].) … (People v. Brown, supra, at p. 789, fn. 6 .)

Governing Bd. of ABC Unified Sch. Dist. v. Haar

28 Cal. App. 4th 369 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 16, 1994

(Morrison v. State Board of Education (1969) 1 Cal.3d 214, 229 [ 82 Cal.Rptr. 175 , 461 P.2d 375 ]; Fontana Unified School Dist. v. Burman, supra, 45 Cal.3d 208, 219-220 .) … However, the determinative test of a charge of immoral or unprofessional conduct is fitness to teach (Board of Education v.

Gitmed v. General Motors Corp.

26 Cal. App. 4th 824 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 7, 1994

The facts here are similar to those in Brown v. Brown (1959) 169 Cal.App.2d 54 [ 337 P.2d 140 ]. Brown involved a demurrer which was sustained with 10 days leave to amend. … The answer, filed after the time has elapsed, may, in the court’s discretion . . . , be stricken out on motion of the plaintiff, and then the default may be entered.’ ” (Brown v. Brown, supra, 169 Cal.App.2d at p. 57 .)

Schefke v. Superior Court

136 Cal. App. 2d 715 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 3, 1955

(To the same effect, Brown *718 v. Cleveland Tractor Co. (1933), 265 Mich. 475 [ 251 N.W. 557 ].) Other jurisdictions have held as did the court in McDonald v. … Board of Water Comrs., supra, 97 A. 336 , even though that parking was on the highway itself. The alternative writ is discharged and the petition denied. Peters, P.

Ramirez v. California State Personnel Board CA1/4

California Court of Appeal · Oct 2, 2023

The Board considered the factors from Skelly v. … BROWN, P. J. WE CONCUR: STREETER, J. HIRAMOTO, J. Ramirez v.

City of Fresno v. Superior Court

156 Cal. App. 3d 1137 · California Court of Appeal · May 10, 1984

Opinion BROWN (G. A.), P. J. … (McAlpine v. Baumgartner (1937) 10 Cal.2d 409, 417-418 [ 74 P.2d 753 ]; Dupuy v. Board of Education (1930) 106 Cal.App. 533, 538 [ 289 P. 689 ].)

Covina-Azusa Fire Fighters Union, Local 2415 v. City of Azusa

81 Cal. App. 3d 48 · California Court of Appeal · May 18, 1978

(See Kingston v. Dept. of Motor Vehicles, supra, 271 Cal.App.2d 549 ; Steen v. Board of Civil Service Commrs. (1945) 26 Cal.2d 716 [ 160 P.2d 816 ]; Code Civ. Proc., § 581d; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2(b).) … (See Davis v. State Board of Optometry (1939) 35 Cal.App.2d 428 [ 95 P.2d 959 ].)

People v. Shepherd

141 Cal. App. 2d 367 · California Court of Appeal · May 8, 1956

Brown to carry to her employer. Mrs. … (People v. Broes, 138 Cal.App.2d 843 [ 292 P.2d 556 ].) The judgment is affirmed. Wood (Parker), J., and Vallée, J., concurred.

Nicolaysen v. Pacific Home

65 Cal. App. 2d 769 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 19, 1944

Ross (Her mark) “Witnesses to mark: Harry Abeles Dr Brown Thompson.” Mrs. Ross died on March 15, 1942. … (Kennedy v. Lee (1905), 147 Cal. 596 , 603 *774 [ 290 P. 886 ]; Kales v. Houghton (1923), 190 Cal. 294, 300 [ 212 P. 21 ].)

People v. Black

73 Cal. App. 13 · California Court of Appeal · May 29, 1925

The cases on the point are many, and run, at least, from People v. Lopez, 59 Cal. 362 , to People v. Rodley, 131 Cal. 240 [ 63 Pac. 351 ], and People v. Russell, 19 Cal. … Simonsen, 107 Cal. 346 [ 40 Pac. 440 ]; People v. Besold, 154 Cal. 363 [ 97 Pac. 871 ] ; People v. Clark, 70 Cal.

Lyon Metal Products, Inc. v. St. Bd. of Equalization

58 Cal. App. 4th 906 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 24, 1997

We agree with the Board. … Co. v.

Candlestick Properties, Inc. v. San Francisco Bay Conservation & Development Commission

11 Cal. App. 3d 557 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 24, 1970

Bank v. … when the statutes involved required the whole “Board” to act.

Hall v. COURT REPORTERS BD. OF CALIFORNIA

119 Cal. Rptr. 2d 847 · California Court of Appeal · May 20, 2002

Our analysis of the Board’s disciplinary purview begins with a review of the governing statutes. (Flannery v. Prentice (2001) 26 Cal.4th 572, 578 [ 110 Cal.Rptr.2d 809 , 28 P.3d 860 ].) … (See Gray v.

Service Employees International Union v. County of Napa

99 Cal. App. 3d 946 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 19, 1979

as the responsibilities of the elected representatives of the tax-paying public are overarching and fundamentally nondelegable, it must be taken, in the absence of clear, unequivocal agreement to the contrary, that the board … Taylor v. Crane thus gives effect to the established rule iterated by Freeman v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins.