Case law

Pacific Coast Coal Co. v. Lindsay Cooperative Citrus Ass'n

112 Cal. App. 207 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 25, 1931

If such relation be established, it imposes upon the bank a liability to a party to whom it was not before bound at all, and it converts the privilege of the bank to pay if in funds into an absolute and unconditional duty … Anyone claiming to be the beneficiary of a contract of this kind, independent of and collateral to the check, must clearly show that the bank intended to make it.

Service Employees International Union, Local 660 v. City of Santa Barbara

125 Cal. App. 3d 459 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 10, 1981

However, in the Fire Fighters case the Court of Appeal, because the City of Azusa had adopted no rules and regulations pursuant to section 3507, qualified this broad principle with the proviso that “Unless and until the city … Section 3.12.090 cannot be considered violative of equal protection unless it clearly appears that there is no reason sufficient to justify the different classification applied to Local 660. (Patton v.

TINY B., INC. v. City of Newport Beach

81 Cal. Rptr. 2d 6 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 30, 1998

In February 1994, the city council denied the application because the Mermaid did not qualify as a restaurant, the only use for which the site was zoned. … On the first element, Justice Souter and the plurality agreed, the indecency statute was clearly within the constitutional power of the state.

Janik v. Rudy, Exelrod & Zieff

14 Cal. Rptr. 3d 751 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 22, 2004

Clearly the court did not hold, as defendants suggest, that class counsel’s obligation to absent class members does not extend beyond the diligent prosecution of class members’ claims as they are literally described in the … “The rationale is that, as between the lay client and the attorney, the latter is more qualified to recognize and analyze the client’s legal needs.” (Nichols v. Keller, supra, 15 Cal.App.4th at p. 1684 .)

People v. Kerr CA5

California Court of Appeal · Aug 13, 2021

They concede that generally the prosecution must present evidence to establish a prior conviction qualifies as a strike conviction, and a violation of section 243, subdivision (d) only qualifies as a strike if the defendant … And nothing before us precludes the possibility that the record from defendant’s 2010 conviction for a violation of section 243, subdivision (d) established it qualifies as a strike.

Nathaniel v. Greene Motors CA1/1

California Court of Appeal · May 25, 2023

The arbitrator shall have the immunity of a judicial officer from civil liability when acting in the capacity of an arbitrator, which immunity supplements any other existing immunity. … Both procedural and substantive unconscionability must be shown to establish the defense. (Ibid.)

Fair v. BNSF Railway Co.

238 Cal. App. 4th 269 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 30, 2015

“It is well established that the quantum of evidence required to establish liability in an FELA case is much less than in an ordinary negligence action.” (Harbin v. … (In re Marriage of Padgett (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 830, 839 [ 91 Cal.Rptr.3d 475 ] [split in federal authority on effect of qualified domestic relations order under Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ( 29 U.S.C

Lanigan v. Neely

4 Cal. App. 760 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 6, 1907

plaintiff and defendant are unmarried, their mutual agreement and promise to marry, the violation and breach by defendant of such agreement and promise, and other facts sufficiently well pleaded to render the complaint immune … The purpose of the question was evidently to establish a resemblance between defendant and the child born to plaintiff and which was in court during the trial.

Curtis v. QRS Neon Corp. Ltd.

147 Cal. App. 2d 186 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 26, 1956

The court read subdivision (f), which qualified the effect of subdivision (a). There was no error in reading subdivision (a) of section 694. … continuous operation. ‘ ‘ (e) The State Department of Public Works or local authority is authorized to issue or withhold such permits at its discretion; or, if such permit is issued, to limit the number of trips, or to establish

Kwok v. Transnation Title Insurance Company

170 Cal. App. 4th 1562 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 10, 2009

Appellants would qualify as distributees under Corporations Code section 17001, subdivision (j) only in their individual capacities. … A transfer of property by gift is clearly a voluntary act that does not arise automatically upon death or dissolution.

Legacy Vulcan Corp. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County

184 Cal. App. 4th 285 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 30, 2010

But clause (2) established the defense obligation with respect to the excess coverage. … for Vulcan to conclude, with respect to the umbrella coverage, that the claims for which clause (1) provided a defense obligation were the same claims for which clause (b) provided an indemnity obligation, absent language clearly

Davis Boat Manufacturing-Nordic, Inc. v. Smith

California Court of Appeal · Sep 19, 2023

Clearly, the Legislature could not have intended such an absurd result. … “When a court reviews extrinsic material to determine whether a latent ambiguity exists, it must be careful not to rewrite an unambiguous statute by inserting qualifying language.”

Center for Biological Diversity v. County of San Bernardino

247 Cal. App. 4th 326 · California Court of Appeal · May 10, 2016

“Abuse of discretion is established if the agency has not proceeded in a manner required by law or if the determination or decision is not supported by substantial evidence.” (Pub. … As noted in the final EIR, “State agencies, such as [Santa Margarita], have sovereign immunity from local regulation, such as the County‟s local building and zoning ordinances, unless such immunity has been waived.

Dolores Canning Co. v. Howard

40 Cal. App. 3d 673 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 17, 1974

Issues The issues are clearly spelled out by the trial court’s memorandum opinion. … However laudable the purpose of section 2805, it clearly affects immigration in areas of federal concern. We refer again to the concept outlined in Hines v. Davidowitz, supra, 312 U.S. 52 .

D and S Homes v. Ludlow CA2/5

California Court of Appeal · Jul 7, 2015

Moreover, they do not qualify under any of the subsections of section 452. … The erroneous ruling was clearly prejudicial to Bowen and Ludlow.13 A plaintiff who fails to present admissible evidence that establishes a prima facie claim to relief on its complaint, fails to meet its burden under

Brinkley v. Monterey Financial Services, Inc.

242 Cal. App. 4th 294 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 19, 2015

The RIC thus clearly evidences an interstate transaction. … Further, courts "interpret the statutory terms 'custodian' and 'other qualified witness' broadly." (Ibid.)

Alvarez v. Altamed Health Services Corporation

California Court of Appeal · Feb 4, 2021

Altamed contends the court’s ruling is clearly erroneous on this issue. We agree. … “The general principles of unconscionability are well established.

Ciraulo v. City of Newport Beach

54 Cal. Rptr. 3d 515 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 17, 2007

In any event, we would not agree the court's rather lengthy order denying the mandate petition was insufficient to qualify as a statement of decision. … But that case is clearly distinguishable from this one. In Anderson, the homeowner was entirely innocent, and built her home in accordance with the permit issued by the City.

California Teachers Assn. v. Governing Board

195 Cal. App. 3d 285 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 2, 1987

Although it claimed that no position existed which Grelling could fill, during the 1983-1984 school year the district employed a new employee to fill a position for which Grelling was qualified. … If a school district hires a certificated person as a temporary employee, the written statement shall clearly indicate the temporary nature of the employment and the length of time for which the person is being employed.

Brockman v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals

California Court of Appeal · Sep 19, 2025

Rather, the party must establish the precise arbitration provision the parties incorporated into their agreement to govern their disputes”]; see id. at p. 69 [incorporation by reference requires the parties’ contract to clearly … But even if we assume that the forfeited issue qualifies for such consideration, there is no rule that “an appellate court must consider a pure question of law raised for the first time on appeal.