Case law

Pirkig v. Dennis

215 Cal. App. 3d 1560 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 31, 1989

Respondents clearly fall within the latter defined categories of the statute. … That such a coincidence does not affect the plaintiff’s right to recover costs and attorney fees under section 1032 is well established by the governing case law, especially Ferraro v. Southern Cal.

People v. Bowers

52 Cal. Rptr. 3d 74 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 14, 2006

In March 2005, a petition for extended commitment under section 1026.5 was filed alleging pursuant to the DMH’s recommendation that Bowers qualified for an extension of her commitment under section 1026.5, subdivision (b) … These opinions clearly establish that Bowers’s mental illness caused her to have serious difficulty controlling her violent impulses and she continued to present a substantial danger of physical harm to others should she

Optional Capital v. Akin Gump Strauss, Hauer & Feld LLP

California Court of Appeal · Dec 7, 2017

This includes qualifying acts committed by attorneys in representing clients in litigation.” (Rusheen v. Cohen, supra, 37 Cal.4th at p. 1056.) … Penal Code section 496 is immune to Defendants’ special motions to strike. Plaintiff’s reliance on Flatley is misplaced.

C&C Constr., Inc. v. Sacramento Municipal Utility District

18 Cal. Rptr. 3d 715 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 14, 2004

To qualify for such funds a recipient is mandated by regulation to “take affirmative action to remove or overcome the effects of the prior discriminatory practice or usage.” (§ 21.5(b)(7), italics added.) 2 SMUD has done … While I concede the point as an abstraction, it is difficult to imagine a real-life circumstance where that is so; clearly, the Department of Transportation regulation is not one.

Hill v. City of El Centro CA4/1

California Court of Appeal · Feb 11, 2026

In any case, immunity is an affirmative defense (see Wang v. … The immunity conferred by Code of Civil Procedure section 818.8 concerns only commercial or financial transactions (Michael J. v.

Mulligan v. West Coast Fast Freight, Inc.

151 Cal. App. 2d 791 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 19, 1957

The jury was also instructed that where there is evidence that a person did not see or hear that which was in plain sight or clearly audible, there is either *797 a conflict in the evidence or negligent inattention. … In the Carlson case, the court pointed out that the failure to so qualify a similar instruction was, under the facts of that case, prejudicial error; the jury had also been instructed that the law had been violated.

People v. Burden

72 Cal. App. 3d 603 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 10, 1977

On cross-examination defendant also qualified his testimony concerning giving the baby a bottle the morning of his death. He testified in this respect: “Q. And did you feed him a bottle? A. … The doctrine of implied malice is well-established in this state. It was most recently stated by our Supreme Court in People v.

City of Coachella v. Riverside County Airport Land Use Commission

210 Cal. App. 3d 1277 · California Court of Appeal · May 25, 1989

clearly defined machinery for the submission, evaluation and resolution of complaints by aggrieved parties.” … As a matter of statutory interpretation, we conclude that the TALUP does not qualify under the requirements of article 3.5 as a valid “comprehensive land use plan.” V.

BNSF Railway Co. v. Public Utilities Commission

218 Cal. App. 4th 778 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 5, 2013

Public Utilities Com. (1995) 12 Cal.4th 87, 103.) 5 All of the parties here assume that the pedestrian paths that cross the railroad track at issue in this case qualify as public roads, highways, or streets within … The railroads argue that “because . . . sections 7604(a)(1) and (a)(2) incorporate 49 CFR § 222.21 for pedestrian grade crossings, section 7604 clearly requires the use of a locomotive-mounted audible warning device” at those

Ryan v. DeCaprio CA4/3

California Court of Appeal · Mar 28, 2014

Thus, it has been established for well over a century that a communication is absolutely immune from any tort liability if it has “‘some relation’” to judicial proceedings.’” (Contemporary Services Corp. v. Staff Pro. … Although that e-mail might substantively qualify as a demand letter that would be protected by the litigation privilege, The Grace Foundation published the e-mail on its Web site.

Prime Gas, Inc. v. City of Sacramento

184 Cal. App. 4th 697 · California Court of Appeal · May 13, 2010

This occurs in three situations: when ‘ “(1) the subject matter has been so fully and completely covered by general law as to clearly indicate that it has become exclusively a matter of state concern; (2) the subject matter … exception of Evidence Code section 1281 (records of vital statistics), and the work permit may be considered within the hearsay exception of Evidence Code section 1271 (a business record) if the officer(s) could be deemed a qualified

Rider v. County of San Diego

11 Cal. App. 4th 1410 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 23, 1992

This general understanding of article XIII B, coupled with the fact that section 2 of the article clearly addresses only the “redistribution” of excess tax receipts, compels the common sense conclusion that article XIII B … In order to qualify for an award of attorney fees under section 1021.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, several distinct qualifications must be met.

Tomlinson v. County of Alameda

188 Cal. App. 4th 1406 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 6, 2010

"This court, of course, is not bound to accept concessions of parties as establishing the law applicable to a case." ( Desny v. … To satisfy this criterion, they argue, a project must occur "within the clearly demarcated (and commonly accepted) legal boundaries of a municipality."

Westphal v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

81 Cal. Rptr. 2d 46 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 18, 1998

Plaintiff saw Robert Fugitt, D.C., one time on November 28, 1995, for a qualified medical examination at the request of the workers’ compensation carrier. … Although the award was generous, the court indicated it was not surprised and could not say the jury clearly should have reached a different verdict.

Caldo Oil Co. v. State Water Resources Control Board

44 Cal. App. 4th 1821 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 30, 1996

The purpose of 40 CFR §280.101 is to provide states with the option of establishing financial assurance programs prior to State program approval. … The regulation here is too young to qualify under the rule and there is no indication it has ever been challenged, or even applied before this case, such that it would come to the Legislature’s attention.

Washington v. County of San Diego

California Court of Appeal · Aug 21, 2025

Applying well-established principles of statutory interpretation, we conclude the disputed statutory language is unambiguous and the plain meaning compels us to find in the County’s favor. … Washington is correct that courts should not follow the plain meaning of a statute if doing so would lead to an absurd result and should avoid mechanically construing words in a manner clearly inconsistent with applicable

Hale Bros. v. Milliken

5 Cal. App. 344 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 3, 1907

Examine plans and wire immediately if everything is clearly shown thereon." The evidence shows that defendants, upon receipt of the last-quoted dispatch, at once obtained from P. C. … Is there to be found any enacted proviso qualifying the provisions of the law as to weights and measures in any particular so that they may be disregarded with impunity? In Rogers v. Mechanics' Ins.

People v. Arceo

195 Cal. App. 4th 556 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 13, 2011

admissible as a statement by Mejorado in furtherance of a conspiracy. 15 Hearsay statements by coconspirators may be admitted against a party if independent proof of a conspiracy has been shown, and three preliminary facts are established … Court’s recent clarification of the scope of the Confrontation Clause also eliminates any need to analyze the admissibility of the tape-recording [made by a prison inmate of a conversation with a codefendant] under the rule established

People v. Law

California Court of Appeal · May 5, 2020

Section 1170.95 establishes the following procedure for processing petitions for relief. … Law’s conduct is clearly distinguishable.

People v. Perez

259 Cal. App. 2d 371 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 23, 1968

The testimony of Officer Bailey establishes that he did not arrest defendant until after he had advised him of his constitutional rights. … We are satisfied that the construction placed upon section 976 by the trial court was clearly not within the intent of the Legislature, and that such a construction would be contrary to the established practice in the various