Case law

Smith v. Superior Court

10 Cal. App. 4th 1033 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 29, 1992

There it was held “damages for emotional distress arising out of acts which invade an interest protected by established tort law are recoverable only if the claimed emotional distress naturally ensues from the acts complained … Petitioners’ purported negligence clearly affected plaintiff.

Lissoy v. Leach

139 Cal. App. 4th 434 · California Court of Appeal · May 10, 2006

The petition clearly establishes that the purpose of that trust was to defraud Myers’s creditors, and in particular Lissoy himself. Consequently, the alleged secret trust was the sine qua non of the fraudulent scheme. … And inferences, so long as they are reasonable, are a proper means of establishing facts. The inferences drawn by Lissoy are quite reasonable—some might say unavoidable.

Clover Valley Foundation v. City of Rocklin

197 Cal. App. 4th 200 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 8, 2011

Monitoring of construction would be conducted by a qualified biologist and reported to the appropriate agency. … This evidence establishes a virtual certainty the water will be available, far more than CEQA requires.

Gwynn v. McKinley

30 Cal. App. 381 · California Court of Appeal · May 3, 1916

The petition alleges that the petitioner is, and was, since the first day of January, 1915, the duly elected, qualified, and acting justice of the peace of said township; that the salary provided by law of said justice of … of the County Government Act for the payment of compensation to justices of the peace in Placer, and other counties of the thirty-first class, from the time the amendment was to go into effect, is significant in that it clearly

Carrillo v. Modesto City Schools CA5

California Court of Appeal · Feb 3, 2026

“Enacted in 1963, the Government Claims Act . . . is a comprehensive statutory scheme governing the liabilities and immunities of public entities and public employees for torts.” (Quigley v. … The plaintiff must clearly and specifically set forth the ‘applicable substantive law’ [citation] and the legal basis for amendment, i.e., the elements of the cause of action and authority for it.

Villa v. Cole

4 Cal. App. 4th 1327 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 18, 1992

Such a termination does not necessarily reflect Seeterlin’s opinion that his action against Villa lacked merit, and thus does not qualify as a favorable termination for purposes of a malicious prosecution action. … On this basis, the City clearly could not assume that Villa would forego later claiming the right to reimbursement and indemnification from the City for any attorney fees, litigation costs, or damages he incurred in further

Wedgeworth v. City of Newport Beach CA4/3

California Court of Appeal · Mar 13, 2015

While the evidence clearly shows William was at least emotionally disturbed and possibly suffering from a mental illness, this does not mean he was necessarily suicidal or in need of immediate medical or psychological care … And, also like Giraldo, the district court in Lum did not consider the immunity created by section 845.6.

People v. Garcia

165 Cal. App. 4th 1120 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 25, 2008

The experts for both Garcia and the People agreed that Garcia was a pedophile, [3] and that he had committed three qualifying offenses. … We find this difference inconsequential and clearly it does not transform the amended SVPA into a punitive statute.

People v. Strohl

57 Cal. App. 3d 347 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 19, 1976

We turn to defendant Stroke’s line of argument that his dealings with Gillespie were in • his capacity as the Chief Deputy Coroner of Santa Barbara County, and in that capacity Gillespie did not qualify as an “executive officer … The action of the Coroner in this respect is qualified only by the implied limitation that he not be grossly unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious in the exercise of his discretion.” In addition, in People v.

Stonewall Insurance v. City of Palos Verdes Estates

46 Cal. App. 4th 1810 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 19, 1996

Decisional law clearly establishes that such an order is appealable. (Justus v. Atkinson (1977) 19 Cal.3d 564, 568 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 97 , 565 P.2d 122 ]; Etienne v. … This case clearly meets the criteria for treating the notices of appeal as petitions for a peremptory writ of mandate.

California Chiropractic Ass'n v. Human Relations Agency

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

This action was initiated by plaintiff on August 1, 1973, when it filed its complaint as representative of the class of duly licensed and qualified doctors of chiropractic in the state. … upon provider services for those conditions which may generally be viewed as less life-threatening than those imposed with respect to the services of providers who do frequently deal with life-threatening situations, is clearly

Lueras v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP

221 Cal. App. 4th 49 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 31, 2013

No party has requested we take judicial notice of anything establishing such rescission. … Lueras did not qualify for HAMP modification when, in fact . . . Lueras did qualify for a HAMP modification in breach of industry standards set by 15 [United States Code section] 1639a.” 8.

People v. Salcido

California Court of Appeal · May 13, 2019

Similarly, in Qualified Patients Assn. v. … The court cautioned, however: “Our holding, of course, is not that the information on a cell phone is immune from search . . . .” (Id. at p. 2493.)

Gregory v. County of Los Angeles CA2/4

California Court of Appeal · Nov 21, 2014

(See Qualified Patients Assn. v. City of Anaheim (2010) 187 Cal.App.4th 734, 764.) 5 In support of her position, appellant relies on Cole v. Doe (N.D. … California courts interpreting this provision have focused on whether the organization at issue has sufficient businesslike attributes to qualify as a business establishment when it “appears to have been operating in a capacity

People v. Peraza CA3

California Court of Appeal · Dec 2, 2014

Leon was granted use immunity and testified for the prosecution, admitting he pled guilty to the robbery of Almirol, but denying he actually committed the robbery. … Leon was granted use immunity and testified to having pled guilty to the robbery of Almirol; however, he denied having actually committed the crime.

Sturgeon Petroleums, Ltd. v. Merchants Petroleum Co.

147 Cal. App. 3d 134 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 21, 1983

In addition, appellants’ own letters and admissions establish that they voted against the merger, submitted their shares for endorsement and demanded the shares be purchased at their fair market value. … , 872, fn. 8 [ 114 Cal.Rptr. 868 ].) 3 Merchants expressly pointed out in its merger notice that the explanation of the rights of dissenting shareholders as set forth in that letter and its earlier proxy statement were “qualified

Union of American Physicians & Dentists v. Los Angeles County Employee Relations Commission

32 Cal. Rptr. 3d 547 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 25, 2005

This bill, while clearly in the public interest, presents a viable answer to UAPD winning a contract in Los Angeles County. “. . . … Thus, Flex and Megaflex do qualify as “health benefit plans” within the meaning of section 3504.5(c).

People v. Stoffle

1 Cal. App. 4th 1671 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 24, 1991

The court began with the principle established in Chimel v. … Clearly, the arrestees in Fafowora were recent occupants since DEA agents had been pursuing them in the car.

Armario v. Franco

50 Cal. App. 3d 374 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 1, 1975

However, where, as here, the transaction does not qualify as a gift cciusa mortis, and where the donor intends the gift to take place after his death, the transaction is treated as a testamentary disposition and is invalid … Clearly, a will in which the decedent has left his entire estate to two nephews he had hardly known and seldom seen, to the exclusion of a sister with whom he had had a long, close relationship and other close relatives,

Hicks v. Bd. of Supervisors of Orange Cty.

69 Cal. App. 3d 228 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 22, 1977

Clearly the transfer of the investigative personnel was pursuant to a plan of reorganization and no part of the budgetary action. … In the words of the chairman, “Establish a pool of investigators for the entire county by consolidating the investigative staff of the District Attorney, the Sheriff-Coroner and the Public Defender into one unit.”