Case law

Harris v. Superior Court

100 Cal. App. 3d 762 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 8, 1980

In this connection we think it significant that the United States Supreme Court has clearly rejected the proposition that the constitutional right to a speedy trial \ .. can be quantified into a specified number of days or … Defense counsel is undoubtedly well qualified to represent petitioner, and is pursuing his client’s best interests in a competent manner.” (15 Cal.3d at pp. 783-784.)

Los Angeles Police Protective League v. City of Los Angeles

188 Cal. App. 3d 1 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 19, 1986

[and] will not be disturbed unless the appellate court is convinced that it is clearly wrong.’ ” (Italics added.) … The fact we or some other appellate court decides to publish an opinion does not conclusively establish the underlying action “vindicated an important right.” On the other hand, it is strong evidence on that question.

People v. Smith CA4/2

California Court of Appeal · Jun 3, 2016

The court stated that “applying established principles of statutory construction I believe a petitioner for resentencing under Proposition 47 must establish his or her eligibility for such resentencing. … It broadly covers all thefts and clearly mandates that thefts be considered petty if the property stolen is worth $950 or less.

People v. Faial

California Court of Appeal · Feb 28, 2022

For such persons, Assembly Bill 1950 acts in mitigation by shortening their probation terms regardless of when those terms were established. … Judge Foiles indicated the 12-year sentence he was executing was simply the one imposed by Judge Ayoob, which is consistent with established law. (§ 1203.2, subd.

City of Glendale v. George

208 Cal. App. 3d 1394 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 27, 1989

time period during which appellants can display Christmas and other ornamental lights; a prohibition on further ornamentation of their residence; a ban on acceptance of donations or other payments at their residence; a qualified … This restriction of First Amendment freedom must be clearly defined. “Vague laws offend several important values.

FMC Corp. v. Plaisted & Companies

61 Cal. App. 4th 1132 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 3, 1998

In short the applicable Maryland law has yet to be firmly established. … The evidence is clearly inadmissible.”

People v. Schmitt

155 Cal. App. 2d 87 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 8, 1957

Moses Greenfield, a nuclear physicist, qualified as an expert on the effect of nuclear energy upon the human body. … The existence of the conspiracy may be established by circumstantial evidence (People v.

RCJ Medical Services, Inc. v. Bonta´

111 Cal. Rptr. 2d 223 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 23, 2001

For a state to qualify for federal assistance, the Secretary, customarily acting through the Health Care Finance Administration (‘HCFA’), must approve a State Plan for medical assistance, 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a), that contains … Absent a clearly expressed legislative intention to the contrary, that language must ordinarily be regarded as conclusive.’ ” The United States Supreme Court has noted that “the statutory language controls its construction

People v. Neal CA4/1

California Court of Appeal · Nov 27, 2024

In an effort to establish he was experiencing such symptoms “at or near the time of the offense” (§ 1385, subd. … We thus conclude Neal has not met his burden to establish an abuse of discretion.

In Re JO

178 Cal. App. 4th 139 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 9, 2009

A biological father is one whose paternity is established, but who does not qualify as a presumed father. ( Ibid. ; In re Kobe A. (2007) 146 Cal.App.4th 1113, 1120 [ 53 Cal.Rptr.3d 437 ].) … The former partner clearly met the standard for presumed parenthood under section 7611(d).

Jones v. Superior Court

123 Cal. App. 3d 160 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 28, 1981

Clearly, the death penalty initiative is a more sophisticated law, intended to apply to more murderers. … However, the contrary result would create a gap in the special circumstance law for those victim transportations which do not qualify as kidnapings.

Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch v. Department of Forestry & Fire Protection

187 Cal. App. 4th 376 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 10, 2010

The petitioners did not qualify as successful parties because they did not achieve their strategic objective. … Clearly one must have a well-defined legal basis in order to give rise to a claim of right but one must also prevail on factual conclusions that support the claim of right.

People v. Pizarro CA2/3

California Court of Appeal · Sep 23, 2025

The court emphasized that Pizarro “was clearly and unequivocally told he would be deported if he entered into the plea agreement in this case.” … Otherwise, “[e]very qualifying defendant filing a section 1473.7 motion is entitled to a hearing on the merits of the motion.” (People v.

McDonald v. STRUCTURED ASSET SALES, LLC

65 Cal. Rptr. 3d 366 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 30, 2007

SAS alleged the Royalties Agreement was highly suspect as to its terms and content, was vague and ambiguous, lacked adequate consideration, and did not qualify as a will; Townsend was misconstruing the true meaning of the … SAS further objected to McDonald’s attorney filing in Los Angeles a petition to establish a conservatorship for Michael. On June 7, 2006, the trial court held a hearing on the petition for preliminary distribution.

Gherman v. Colburn

72 Cal. App. 3d 544 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 10, 1977

[If] I clearly recall asking that you instruct your clients to cease any dealings purportedly on behalf of Mr. … The contention is clearly a post-trial afterthought. Appellants also complain that the jury awarded speculative damages.

Maher v. County of Alameda

223 Cal. App. 4th 1340 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 18, 2014

It held an object intentionally left in the body for a therapeutic purpose following the completion of a medical procedure does not qualify as a “foreign body” for purposes of section 340.5. … By not spelling out the requirements for each exception, the Legislature was clearly expecting the courts to interpret them in light of prior precedents.

Hasso v. Hapke

227 Cal. App. 4th 107 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 19, 2014

The foregoing evidence does not establish the amount of investor assets transferred back to CFI on unwinding. … between CFI and Fish to establish alter ego liability.

Hardesty v. Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District

202 Cal. App. 4th 404 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 27, 2011

(b)), the Legislature directed the Board to establish by regulation “an optional registration program for portable equipment that is, or may be, used in more than a single district,” and to establish “emission limits and … The District’s response pointed out that the issue was not whether the plant was portable in the literal sense, but whether it qualified for PERP registration.

Foggy v. Ralph F. Clark & Associates, Inc.

192 Cal. App. 3d 1204 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 23, 1987

s determination that the filing of the notice of appeal divested it of jurisdiction to hear the remaining motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and to vacate the judgment and enter a different judgment. *1213 Clearly … Peter had never previously been qualified as an expert; prior to testifying she had not been asked by plaintiffs’ counsel to render an opinion as to the value of the property for any particular date; and she was unable to

Koerber v. Project Veritas CA2/3

California Court of Appeal · Dec 23, 2022

But statements of opinion aren’t always immune from liability. If an opinion implies a false assertion of fact, the opinion may be actionable defamation. (Ibid.) … Finally, we reject defendants’ contention that O’Keefe’s statements in the September 2017 Video are immune from liability under the litigation privilege.