Case law

Air Quality Products, Inc. v. State of California

96 Cal. App. 3d 340 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 24, 1979

.” *347 Board demurred to the amended complaint, asserting inter alia, that (1) Board is not a suable public entity; (2) Board is immune from tort liability pursuant to Government Code sections 818.4 (issuance, denial, suspension … The power to enter into contracts of employment, to fix salaries . . . and to perform all acts necessary to carry out these functions . . . clearly authorizes the board to consummate agreements regarding future wages, in

Kizer v. Hillhaven, Inc.

19 Cal. App. 4th 309 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 17, 1993

In examining the sufficiency of the evidence, “ ‘. . . an appellate court must accept as true all evidence tending to establish the correctness of the finding as made, taking into account, as well, all inferences which might … Code, § 1424.) 2 Section 72501, subdivision (e) provides: “The licensee shall employ an adequate number of qualified personnel to carry out all the functions of the facility and shall provide for initial orientation of all

People v. Gaynor

223 Cal. App. 2d 575 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 19, 1963

Gaynor, since you have rejected the services of a well-qualified lawyer from the public defender’s office, I am going to send it [the ease] out to Division 41, sir, and you will have to represent yourself. … During this six-day period subpoenas were served on the numerous prosecution witnesses requiring their attendance upon the date established for the hearing.

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.

People v. Smith

223 Cal. App. 2d 394 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 17, 1963

And I do feel that he’s probably not qualified to continue with his own defense, but because of our problems between ourselves, I feel I cannot continue.” … Defendant did not seek to cross-examine the rebuttal witness called to establish his past association with Jackson.

Kasparian v. County of Los Angeles

38 Cal. App. 4th 242 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 14, 1995

Conspiracy is not an independent tort; it cannot create a duty or abrogate an immunity. … It allows tort recovery only against a party who already owes the duty and is not immune from liability based on applicable substantive tort law principles. [Citations.]

Plummer v. T.H.E. Ins. Co. CA2/5

California Court of Appeal · Mar 10, 2014

Therefore, because the interpleader action was not “sham litigation,” it qualified as protected activity under section 425.16. 2. … barred by the litigation privilege established in Civil Code 47, subdivision (b).

Haney v. City of Los Angeles

134 Cal. Rptr. 2d 411 · California Court of Appeal · May 22, 2003

Crossman (1989) 210 Cal.App.3d 476 [ 258 Cal.Rptr. 370 ], Cyril O’Connor (O’Connor) liquidated a bank account so his wife could qualify for governmental medical benefits. … In these circumstances, the department clearly did not abuse its discretion in discharging appellant. The judgment is affirmed. Mallano, J., concurred.

Kirkwood v. Rowell

132 Cal. App. 2d 421 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 19, 1955

He testified as to Ms qualifications, training, and experience in handling financial affairs of the family in general, and fully qualified himself as a witness in this respect. … While this may have been the only way of making such determination under the circumstances of that case, it is clearly not the only way in all so-called 1 ‘ close corporations.”

People v. Rubio CA4/3

California Court of Appeal · Jun 24, 2025

“The record of conviction will necessarily inform the trial court’s prima facie inquiry under section [1172.6], allowing the court to distinguish petitions with potential merit from those that are clearly meritless.” … Since the record of conviction established Rubio was not convicted under a vicarious liability theory, relief was properly denied by the court.

People v. Roberts

California Court of Appeal · Sep 9, 2025

) “ ‘ “A defendant challenging the constitutionality of a statute carries a heavy burden: ‘The courts will presume a statute is constitutional unless its unconstitutionality clearly, positively, and unmistakably appears … [It] requires only that the government identify a well-established and representative historical analogue, not a historical twin.

The People v. Barba

215 Cal. App. 4th 712 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 19, 2013

Finally, under the heading “certificate of reviewer,” a state lab examiner who reviewed the analysis certified that the person who tested the sample and prepared the report was qualified to do so and had followed the established … First, whether the prosecutor might have had a motive does not by itself establish a prima facie case of discrimination.

Barkett v. Brucato

122 Cal. App. 2d 264 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 28, 1953

Removing the roof of an occupied dwelling during the rainy season in the manner here done, and the other acts already described, clearly fall within the above definition. … In other words, these cases hold, based on the presumed intent of the parties, that such general clauses were never intended to immunize the landlord from responsibility for his acts of affirmative negligence.

People v. Kobey

105 Cal. App. 2d 548 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 18, 1951

Members of the vice squad of the Los Angeles Police Department, qualified as experts, identified much of the seized material as being paraphernalia commonly used by bookmakers in Los Angeles. … A con *565 spiracy was alleged and the instruction aptly and clearly defined the meaning of bookmaking.

People v. Samaniego

172 Cal. App. 4th 1148 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 16, 2009

Gang evidence was essential to establishing the motive for these senseless murders and tying appellants, gang members, to them. … “When there is no parole eligibility, the [parole eligibility] fine is clearly not applicable.” (People v. Oganesyan (1999) 70 Cal.App.4th 1178, 1183 [ 83 Cal.Rptr.2d 157 ]; People v.

Hale v. Cal. Pub. Employees' Ret. System

California Court of Appeal · Aug 29, 2022

Statutory and Regulatory Background The PERL establishes CalPERS, a prefunded, defined benefit pension plan for state employees and employees of participating local public agencies. (Oden v. … We are mindful of the general rule that we accord great weight to CalPERS’s interpretation of the PERL and its own regulations, unless clearly erroneous. (Prentice, supra, 157 Cal.App.4th at p. 989.)

Johnson v. Johnson

59 Cal. App. 2d 375 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 26, 1943

He was both present and represented by counsel when depositions were taken which establish his speculation with the trust funds in his personal margin account. … As was so clearly pointed out in the Boone case, supra, that is not the law.

People v. Nilo CA5

California Court of Appeal · Aug 28, 2023

argued it qualified as a “crime of dishonesty.” … out of line” of the immunity agreement, which in turn made her testimony inconsistent.

Kumar v. Ramsey

California Court of Appeal · Nov 29, 2021

Ramsey also argues that sanctions may be awarded when a case is clearly time-barred. … sanctions motions, and specifically find that sanctions were warranted because (1) Kumar did not comply with the TRPA’s 60-day deadline to challenge the denial of his appeal, and/or (2) Ramsey was a good faith purchaser and is immune

County of Alameda v. Alameda County Taxpayers' Assn., Inc.

California Court of Appeal · Feb 23, 2024

After receiving an initiative petition signed by 86,513 voters, the registrar certified that the requisite number of valid signatures had been received to qualify the proposed initiative for the ballot (Elec. … An initiative measure “ ‘must be upheld unless [its] unconstitutionality clearly, positively, and unmistakably appears.’ ” (Rossi, supra, 9 Cal.4th at p. 711.)