Case law

Shoemaker v. County of Los Angeles

37 Cal. App. 4th 618 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 4, 1995

The [Review Committee] cannot consider this individual equivalently qualified in emergency medicine. . . . This situation is unacceptable.” … The granting of a mandatory injunction pending trial “ ‘is not permitted except in extreme cases where the right thereto is clearly established.’” (Ibid., quoting Hagen v.

People v. Martinez

106 Cal. App. 3d 524 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 4, 1980

The prior felony conviction was stricken on the ground that a commitment to the California Rehabilitation Center (CRC) did not qualify as a “prior prison term” within the meaning of Penal Code section 667.5. … The statement, defendant urges, has little if any relevance, because “it does not tend to establish that appellant stole the property himself.”

Craig v. City of Poway

28 Cal. App. 4th 319 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 13, 1994

The court clearly precluded the Agency from introducing evidence of the affordability of the neighborhood adjacent to Pomerado Road. 19 However, as reflected above, the court never prevented the Agency from presenting evidence … Section 50105 provided “ ‘Very low income households’ means persons and families whose incomes do not exceed qualifying limits for very low income families as established . . . pursuant to Section 8 of the United States Housing

Botsford v. MacIntosh

76 Cal. App. 2d 452 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 11, 1946

Prior to his death in 1938, he had been a dealer in machinery and equipment, new and secondhand, the nature of which does not clearly appear. … I wouldn’t want to accept them, tecause I think it has teen clearly disclosed that the executor had an adverse interest in othis company.

Zaragoza v. Ibarra

174 Cal. App. 4th 1012 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 8, 2009

The flip side of Scott is that when there is a building sufficiently completed so as to be occupied as a residence, the qualifying language should apply. … Ibarra’s assertion at oral argument that Zaragoza is not within the terms of section 3352, subdivision (h) because he was paid $100, even though he clearly worked less than 52 hours prior to the accident, was conclusively

AlSayyad v. Superior Court CA1/3

California Court of Appeal · Oct 19, 2020

Because the P&T Committee determined that the evidence did not “clearly and convincingly show” that AlSayyad’s comments were false, it concluded that the evidence “does not clearly support a charge that Professor AlSayyad … exam, and effort to establish yourself as her most important supporter, were examples of using your power for personal gain.”

Jeld-Wen, Inc. v. Superior Court

32 Cal. Rptr. 3d 351 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 1, 2005

by saying that the employer had only made a qualified acceptance of vicarious liability, and because no determination had yet been made of the employee’s liability, the negligent entrustment count remained a triable issue … In any case, the principles set out in Armenia, supra, 42 Cal.2d 448 , are clearly applicable to this case and we are borrad by them.

Aguilar v. Association for Retarded Citizens

234 Cal. App. 3d 21 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 9, 1991

The APA establishes “basic minimum procedural requirements for the adoption, amendment or repeal of administrative regulations.” (Gov. Code, § 11346.) … First, the IWC Wage Order clearly distinguishes between employees who work 24-hour shifts and those who work less than 24-hour shifts.

People v. Wilder

151 Cal. App. 2d 698 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 13, 1957

The law fixes no prescribed standard whereby to measure the mental competency to qualify one as a witness, and therefore, the determination is almost wholly within the discretion of the trial judge (People v. … In the case now before us, if appellant touched the prosecutrix in the manner she testified he did, such evidence was clearly sufficient to sustain the conviction of violation of section 288 of the Penal Code.

Paralift, Inc. v. Superior Court

23 Cal. App. 4th 748 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 20, 1993

Factual and Procedural Background Decedent was a highly qualified and licensed skydiver who had made over 900 skydives prior to the fatal jump which gave rise to this action. … The standards which a release such as this one must meet are well established. “To be effective, a release need not achieve perfection; . . .” (National & Internal Brotherhood of Street Racers, Inc. v.

Bowen v. Bowen

91 Cal. App. 4th 1291 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 29, 2001

Appellant filed an order to show cause, seeking a qualified domestic relations order to establish her rights to benefits under respondent’s two Flying Tiger pension plans. … Clearly, the additional seven years with Federal Express cannot be included in the denominator. 3.

Daves v. Daves

173 Cal. App. 3d 97 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 10, 1985

The California Supreme Court found the lower court erred in exercising jurisdiction: Husband had insufficient minimum contacts to establish personal jurisdiction, use of his habeas corpus proceeding for purposes of establishing … As indicated previously, California clearly had initial subject matter jurisdiction under grounds set forth in both sections 5152, subdivision (1)(a), and 5152, subdivision (l)(b).

Wood v. Roach

125 Cal. App. 631 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 1, 1932

Sidney Wood died testate on January 30, 1908; that his will was admitted to probate in the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, and that plaintiff and Baldwin Wood, now deceased, were duly appointed and qualified … By the enactments of 1919 it was manifestly the intention to establish a new and complete scheme with respect to proceedings for the sale of the property of decedents’ estates.

Chodosh v. Palm Beach Park Association CA4/3

California Court of Appeal · Dec 19, 2024

Although Chodosh I determined a couple of the mobilehome criteria were clearly satisfied—“‘use as a single family dwelling’” and “‘with or without a foundation system’”—it noted there was a lack of evidence concerning the … Plaintiffs bore the burden of establishing, through facts and the law, an affirmative defense to the Association’s cross-claim for unpaid rent.

Stanley v. Superior Court

206 Cal. App. 4th 265 · California Court of Appeal · May 22, 2012

In explaining this ruling, the trial court stated, “We simply do not have qualified jurors who can serve, and as a result, it was agreed that if we would have had only 12 jurors, we would start over, and, in addition, I believe … In Himmelfarb , the Ninth Circuit stated, “[t]he mere silence of an accused or his failure to object or to protest a discharge of the jury cannot amount to a waiver of this immunity.”

Lewis v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

56 Cal. App. 3d 938 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 1, 1976

. : . plus constant slight but clearly apparent involuntary shaking of the head.” The award authorized “further medical treatment . . . including house traction equipment.” … Most qualifying cardiologists would rate this a possible risk factor only.” On reconsideration of both claims the board accepted the medical opinion of Dr.

Hospital Systems, Inc. v. Office of Statewide Health Planning & Development

25 Cal. App. 4th 1686 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 17, 1994

The court found that in such a case, the proceeding qualified as an “action” for purposes of section 1021.5 (attorney fees may be awarded to a successful party “in any action which has resulted in the enforcement of an important … The rule enunciated in Best thus clearly envisioned a court proceeding as one of the steps in resolving a given dispute, either before or after the administrative proceeding.

California Shoppers, Inc. v. Royal Globe Insurance Co.

175 Cal. App. 3d 1 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 26, 1985

The fact that the purported *67 expert may be qualified in one field vaguely related to another does not mean that he is qualified in that other field. ( Putensen v. Clay Adams, Inc. (1970) 12 Cal. … While plaintiff's additional requests for a $100,000 settlement of the instant action and assumption of the defense of the Adco action may or may not have been reasonable, the letter and Harding's testimony clearly establish

Boas v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n

51 Cal. App. 2d 592 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 30, 1942

We are of the opinion that no ground for reversal has been established. The respondent H. H. Bechtel is the assignee and agent of the respondent bank. … Even construing as a conclusion of law the trial court’s finding that the agreement is unsupported by a consideration, clearly such conclusion may be drawn from the contents of the instrument itself and from the other facts

McCullough v. Langer

23 Cal. App. 2d 510 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 18, 1937

Rea in that regard was clearly elicited from the appellant in other questions which were answered without objections, as follows: “Mr. Work: Q. … As a hypothetical question it was clearly defective. An answer to that question would throw no light on the issues in the present ease.