Case law

Glennen v. Allergan, Inc.

247 Cal. App. 4th 1 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 29, 2016

The brochure also states that surgeons were required to be observed by “qualified personnel” during their first band placements, to have the equipment and experience necessary to complete the procedure via laparotomy if required … established quality system requirements and to determine the effectiveness of the quality system.”

Greenwell v. Auto-Owners Insurance

233 Cal. App. 4th 783 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 27, 2015

Greenwell contends that McGee is “indistinguishable” from this case, but that is clearly not true. At least two significant facts distinguish this case from McGee. … Co. (1957) 149 Cal.App.2d 171, 172-173 [Alabama insurance company that never qualified to do business in California nonetheless insured losses arising out of automobile accidents occurring anywhere in the continental United

Pimentel v. the Hall-Baker Co.

32 Cal. App. 2d 697 · California Court of Appeal · May 18, 1939

Thus we find the following rules established by decisions in California: (1) Where, as is usual, the obligations of an oil lease are not mutual and reciprocal and there is no mutuality of remedies, an action for specific … It clearly appears that the lease could not have been specifically enforced because of lack of mutuality of remedies. *706 In California Trust Co. v.

American & National Leagues of Professional Baseball Clubs v. Major League Baseball Players Ass'n

59 Cal. App. 3d 493 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 25, 1976

The DCIA was prepared in conformity with the requirements for tax treatment of deferred income and after a favorable IRS ruling had been received approving the plan as qualified for the desired tax treatment. … Such a position, if sustained, would put the owners at the mercy of the players for an owner could never risk a decision unfavorable to himself by an arbitrator immune in large part from the scrutiny of the courts.

Johnson v. Raytheon Co.

California Court of Appeal · Mar 27, 2019

Even the most cursory review of the facts in this case establishes that Johnson cannot satisfy this test. … Moreover, Johnson cannot establish that ABM could not reasonably have discovered the hazardous condition.

Paris v. Community Redevelopment Agency

167 Cal. App. 3d 489 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 29, 1985

Paris and established more precise requirements with respect to commercial development in that area.” … “No property shall qualify for a Conditional Use Permit or Conditional Use Permit—Minor Modification unless each and every requirement and finding hereinabove set forth in this Subsection can be shown and that the Planning

CAL. PAC. HOMES, INC. v. Scottsdale Ins. Co.

83 Cal. Rptr. 2d 328 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 25, 1999

This trial court clearly applied the self-insured retention amount. … Rptr.2d 176 .) *333 After considering the question of how liability should be borne between several primary insurers and applying principles of equity the court adopted what it characterized as "`qualified time on the risk

Blackburn v. Charnley

11 Cal. Rptr. 3d 885 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 8, 2004

Unlike the CAR purchase agreement executed by the parties, the reservation instrument clearly states, “This is not an offer or contract to purchase or sell.” … The language states only that Charnley “failed to establish at trial that his broker or agent failed to meet the applicable standard of care.”

People v. K.F.

173 Cal. App. 4th 655 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 29, 2009

He expressed “our belief and a lay belief but I think a reasonable reading that the medical procedure used in this particular instance was clearly an over[-]treatment for a broken finger, [ft] Such things occur and are commonplace … We qualify this statement only to acknowledge that an administrative agency’s interpretation of a law within its special purview may be entitled to appellate deference. (See MHC Operating Limited Partnership v.

Brown v. Nelson

94 Cal. App. 576 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 30, 1928

other living relatives, whose sole possession is $500 in cash, and who is confronted with none of the attachments or situations ordinarily surrounding a man of great wealth, will suffer comparatively little mental strain in qualifying … Being clearly pertinent to the injury, the conclusion is irresistible that they furnish some substantial evidence relating to the testamentary capacity of the testator.

IBC Business Owners for Sensible Development v. City of Irvine

California Court of Appeal · Feb 6, 2023

“Courts ‘should afford great weight to the Guidelines except when a provision is clearly unauthorized or erroneous under CEQA.’” (Save Our Access etc. v. … Clearly, final approval of an addendum itself does not constitute its own CEQA step.

Barton v. Owen

71 Cal. App. 3d 484 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 1, 1977

In much the same way that laymen are not qualified to judge whether a doctor has been negligent because of their lack of common knowledge on the subject, they also are not qualified from a medical standpoint to determine … Clearly, this might have been the result of the plaintiff’s intended voir dire question.

In re I.F.

California Court of Appeal · Jul 31, 2017

As both parties recognize, there is a ― ‗well-established presumption that statutes apply prospectively in the absence of a clearly expressed contrary intent.‘ ‖ (See Californians for Disability Rights v. … permitting juveniles to have their records automatically sealed after successful completion of probation rather than after tobacco sellers to tort liability for acts performed at a time when they enjoyed the protection of an immunity

Tavares v. Zipcar, Inc.

California Court of Appeal · Jan 30, 2026

Finally, to the extent Tavares was seeking to hold Zipcar vicariously liable as the owner of the vehicle, Zipcar argued it was immune from liability under the federal Graves Amendment (49 U.S.C. § 30106) (the Graves Amendment … that remote rental car companies have an affirmative duty to assess whether a customer “appears” impaired at the time of the rental to be inconsistent with the relevant statutes, and the cases imposing such a duty to be clearly

Taylor v. Board of Education

31 Cal. App. 2d 734 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 28, 1939

Ed. 57 ], an act of the Illinois legislature in 1917 established teacher tenure in the Chicago schools following a three-year probationary period. … It is also equally well established that the intention of the Legislature thus to create contractual obligations, resulting in ex-tinguishment to a certain extent of governmental powers, must clearly and unmistakably appear

A-Mark Coin Co. v. General Mills, Inc.

148 Cal. App. 3d 312 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 25, 1983

Its power to act as it did is established and, in our view, beyond question.” … In addition, respondents’ actions clearly came within the privilege of competition.

Hodson v. Woods

160 Cal. App. 3d 1227 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 19, 1984

An aged, blind or disabled individual who qualifies for cash assistance is automatically financially eligible for services under the IHSS program. (§ 12304.) An individual, such as Ms. … The trial court concluded, and we have affirmed, the regulations themselves are valid and clearly comport with the requirements of section 12051.

Knudson v. Adams

137 Cal. App. 261 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 8, 1934

The evidence which was presented to the court established that the three deeds which were executed by Carrie A. Love on July 25, 1923, were given to H. Z. … However, the rule that the matter of the grantor’s intention is a question of fact which rests in the determination of the trial court is necessarily qualified by the limitation that it must be reached upon a consideration

People v. Farias CA3

California Court of Appeal · May 26, 2023

Certain conduct that was considered gang participation prior to Rodriguez no longer qualified. … Here, section 186.22 has been amended in a way that narrowed the definition of what qualifies as a street gang offense.

Jolley v. Chase Home Finance, LLC

213 Cal. App. 4th 872 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 11, 2013

This was done at WaMu’s insistence, as Jolley was told that increasing the size and scope of the project would qualify him for a higher loan amount. … The court observed “[t]hat exchange establishes nothing more than a willingness to consider future loan applications and does not establish a fraudulent promise to make a loan. [Citation.]”