Case law

California Chiropractic Ass'n v. Human Relations Agency

91 Cal. App. 3d 141 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 28, 1979

Board of Election (1969) 394 U.S. 802, 808-809 [ 22 L.Ed.2d 739, 745 , 89 S.Ct. 1404 ]; Dandridge v. Williams (1970) 397 U.S. 471, 485 [ 25 L.Ed.2d 491, 501-502 , 90 S.Ct. 1153 ].) … In Dandridge v.

Cvrcek v. State Personnel Bd.

247 Cal. App. 2d 827 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 18, 1967

That this rule applies to a review of findings of fact made by the State Personnel Board is attested by Neely v. … The court upheld the State Personnel Board’s finding that the agent’s lying constituted dishonesty. In Board of Education v.

People v. Goodo

147 Cal. App. 2d 7 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 17, 1956

In People v. … In Willson v.

People v. Cheatham

50 Cal. App. 3d 592 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 11, 1975

(Select Base Materials v. Board of Equal. (1959) 51 Cal.2d 640, 645 [ 335 P.2d 672 ].) … Proc., § 1858; People v. Gilbert (1969) 1 Cal.3d 475, 480 [ 82 Cal.Rptr. 724 , 462 P.2d 580 ]; Select Base Materials v. Board of Equal., supra, 51 Cal.2d at p. 645 .)

Rex Club v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd.

53 Cal. App. 4th 1465 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 31, 1997

Appeals Board (1978) 43 Cal.Comp.Cases 1143.) … (Mission Insurance Co. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Board, supra, 43 Cal.Comp.Cases 1143.)

Simons v. City of Los Angeles

72 Cal. App. 3d 924 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 25, 1977

(Mountain Defense League v. Board of Supervisors, supra, 65 Cal.App.3d 723, 730 ; Stoddard v. … As was said by the court in Brown v. City of Berkeley, 57 Cal.App.3d 223 , at pages 230-231 [ 129 Cal.Rptr. 1 ]: “Ordinances are invalid if they conflict with the charter. (Acton v.

Construction Ind. Force Acct. Council v. Ross Valley Sanitation

California Court of Appeal · Feb 19, 2016

It is equally improper to “read things into statutory provisions, particularly when they are clearly stated as here” (Delta Wetlands, supra, at p. 1594), and to render statutory language “mere surplusage” (Brown v. … (See Souvannarath v.

McCleery v. City of Bakersfield

170 Cal. App. 3d 1059 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 6, 1985

(Brown v. Colm (1974) 11 Cal.3d 639, 646 [ 141 Cal.Rptr. 128 , 522 P.2d 688 ].) … Co. v. Kurt Hitke & Co. (1956) 46 Cal.2d 517, 522 [ 297 P.2d 428 ].)

Sherwood Mechanical v. Cal OSHA Appeal Bd. CA4/1

California Court of Appeal · Dec 5, 2014

(Teichert Construction v. … Local Union 246, AFL-CIO v.

Rivera v. Division of Industrial Welfare

265 Cal. App. 2d 576 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 10, 1968

Bank v. Franchise Tax Board (1961) 55 Cal.2d 407, 419-421 [ 11 Cal.Rptr. 289 , 359 P.2d 625 ]; City & County of San Francisco v. Superior Court (1951) 38 Cal.2d 156, 162 [ 238 P.2d 581 ]; Franchise Tax Board v. … A measure of fame now surrounds footnote 11 in Brown v.

Spurr v. Daniels

152 Cal. App. 2d 867 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 29, 1957

The applicable rule is stated in Brown v. … (Thompson v. McKay, 41 Cal. 227 ; Champion v. Wood, 79 Cal. 17 [ 12 Am.St.Rep. 126 , 21 P. 534 ].)” A companion appeal in Brown v.

Eaton v. Connolly-Pacific, Inc.

134 Cal. App. 3d 825 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 6, 1982

Similarly, in Gonzales v. United States Shipping Board, E. F. Corp. (E.D.N.Y. 1924) 3 F.2d 168, 169-170 , 130 ships in a mothballed fleet were not vessels within the meaning of the act. Plaintiffs reliance on Butler v. … (Brown v. ITT Rayonier, Inc. (5th Cir. 1974) 497 F.2d 234, 237 , and cases collected.) Thus, the critical issue in this case is the status of the barge and not the function performed by plaintiff on that barge.

Schoendorf v. U.D. Registry, Inc.

118 Cal. Rptr. 2d 313 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 28, 2002

(See Medical Board v. Superior Court (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 1001 , 1017 & fn. 47 [ 106 Cal.Rptr.2d 381 ].) 3. … (See Krain v. Medical Board (1999) 71 Cal.App.4th 1416, 1426 [ 84 Cal.Rptr.2d 586 ].) 4.

In Re Singler

73 Cal. Rptr. 3d 864 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 26, 2008

Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Jennifer A. Neill, Heather M. Heckler and Andrew R. … After being informed of his Miranda rights ( Miranda v.

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. v. Amador Water Agency

California Court of Appeal · Jun 14, 2019

II, § 9; Rossi v. Brown (1995) 9 Cal.4th 688, 697, fn. 3 (Rossi) [1911 adoption].) … (Santos v. Brown (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 398, 410 (Santos).) We accordingly conclude the term “tax” in the general referendum provision (art. II, § 9) encompasses water service fees.

Siri v. Sutter Home Winery, Inc.

California Court of Appeal · Jan 23, 2019

admittedly prepared and shared all or part of that information with the Board. [¶] . . . … (See, e.g., Schnabel v. Superior Court (1993) 5 Cal.4th 704, 719-721; Sav-On Drugs, Inc. v. Superior Court (1975) 15 Cal.3d 1, 6-7; Brown v. Superior Court (1977) 71 Cal.App.3d 141.)

Cappa v. Oscar C. Holmes, Inc.

25 Cal. App. 3d 978 · California Court of Appeal · May 30, 1972

Holly Sugar Corp., 107 Cal.App.2d 298 [ 237 P.2d 28 ]); and school children (Lehmann v. L. A. City Board of Education, 154 Cal.App.2d 256 [ 316 P.2d 55 ]). … Brown [the witness], Mr. Modena [plaintiff’s attorney] was asking you about railings and barricades and scaffolding and this sort of thing, protection for the workers.

Cornell v. Reilly

127 Cal. App. 2d 178 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 18, 1954

(Moore v. State Board of Equalization, 76 Cal.App.2d 758, 764 [ 174 P.2d 323 ] ; see also Bus. & Prof. Code, § 24200; Covert v. … (Traxler v. Board of Medical Examiners, 135 Cal.App. 37 [ 26 P.2d 710]; Bold v. Board of Medical Examiners, 135 Cal.App. 29 [26 P.2d 707]; Saxton v. State Board of Education, 137 Cal.App. 167 [ 29 P.2d 873 ].)

Amerigraphics, Inc. v. Mercury Casualty Co.

182 Cal. App. 4th 1538 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 23, 2010

Volper called Brown and told him he wanted to make a claim for normal operating expenses. Brown responded that there was no such coverage. … (See Bonds v.

Christiana v. Rose

100 Cal. App. 2d 46 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 20, 1950

This is the direct holding of Brown v. … v.