Case law

People v. Andahl

California Court of Appeal · Mar 19, 2021

(Senate Bill 136) amended section 667.5, subdivision (b) to limit qualifying prior prison terms to those served for sexually violent offenses, which defendant’s prior offenses were not. … Here, defendant’s criminal proceeding is clearly ongoing, as the trial court’s order revoking his probation and executing the previously imposed prison sentence has not yet reached final disposition in the highest court in

Rubenstein v. Rubenstein

97 Cal. Rptr. 2d 707 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 29, 2000

However, the Dale decision clearly was a major departure from *1147 existing law. 9 Where a civil judgment is procured by extrinsic fraud, the normal remedy is to seek equitable relief from the judgment, not to sue in tort … Grant of summary judgment must be reversed because Alan failed to establish the action is barred by section 2122.

Jackson v. Super. Ct.

California Court of Appeal · Mar 21, 2025

And although this clearly is an arduous task, it is not impossible. However, this type of inquiry requires a case by case approach based on the unique evidence offered. … We note that the data provided by Jackson clearly shows a stark disparity in the treatment of Black people pulled over by the SDPD compared to white people.

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.

People v. Hernandez

177 Cal. App. 4th 1182 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 22, 2009

Our analysis of the statute is guided by well-established rules. … Since appellant’s release did not qualify as an O.R. release under applicable law, the enhancement findings under section 12022.1 were not supported by the evidence and must be reversed.

People v. Viera CA2/1

California Court of Appeal · Apr 10, 2026

The court also noted that the documents provided by the defense (presumably referencing the doctor’s report) established that at the time of the offense, Viera was on parole and was receiving mental health medication and … This is supported by the reference in the psychologist’s report to Viera being on his psychiatric medications at the time of the offense, as the prescribing of psychiatric medications is clearly part of a course of mental

People v. Carrillo

105 Cal. Rptr. 2d 360 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 27, 2001

Defendant has not provided any *1422 authority establishing that judicial modification of an existing sentence encompasses the reinstatement of a dismissed strike. In addition, People v. … Garcia, supra, 20 Cal.4th 490 noted regarding the distinctions made in Santana : “Taken in context, however, these statements clearly refer only to the sentence for the single conviction at issue in that case.

Stills v. Gratton

55 Cal. App. 3d 698 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 25, 1976

He informed her that it would be necessary for her, in order to qualify for such legal abortion under the provisions of Health and Safety Code section 25951, to obtain the approval of the hospital committee and to be examined … However, there are certain types of malpractice which may be established without requiring expert opinion.

California Union Square L.People v. Saks & Company LLC

California Court of Appeal · Oct 29, 2021

In addition, the arbitrator selection provision in Section 3.1(c)(ii) states that if the parties are unable to agree on an arbitrator, “either party . . . may request appointment of such a qualified person by the then Chief … Although the clause is clearly directed at the arbitration proceeding itself, it is broad enough to cover fees on this appeal.

McAllister v. California Coastal Commission

169 Cal. App. 4th 912 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 30, 2008

Rather, they focus on those particular resources that play a special role in an ecosystem and qualify an area as an environmentally sensitive habitat. … Clearly, the Commission had a duty to make express findings that it was excusing strict compliance with the development restriction to avoid a taking if that had been its reason for approving the Project.

People v. Lyons CA2/6

California Court of Appeal · Dec 9, 2014

Although the record does not disclose whether or not [the detective] made any representations to that effect, his admitted conduct spoke as clearly as words – first by surrendering to [them his] own private office so that … "'A person is qualified to testify as an expert if he has special knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education sufficient to qualify him as an expert on the subject to which his testimony relates[.]'"

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.

Gonsalves v. Li

232 Cal. App. 4th 1406 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 13, 2015

In sum, the speeding tickets were not relevant to establish Xiaoming’s liability or to otherwise “impeach” Xiaoming. … Li does not establish that the scope of Rao’s testimony was beyond that appropriate for a treating physician. Therefore, Li fails to meet his burden of establishing error. B.

Wilson & Wilson v. City Council

191 Cal. App. 4th 1559 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 25, 2011

Validation Actions Are Not Immune From Mootness Citing Woodward Park Homeowners Assn. v. Garreks, Inc. (2000) 77 Cal.App.4th 880 [ 92 Cal.Rptr.2d 268 ] (Woodward Park) and Neilson v. … Clearly, the Woodward Park court was concerned about the public policy effects of finding the appeal moot on the facts before it.

Elysian Heights Residents Ass'n v. City of Los Angeles

182 Cal. App. 3d 21 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 6, 1986

Clearly, similar reasoning is applicable to building permits which conflict with general plans. … At most, therefore, the lawful issuance of a permit by the bureau can confer a conditional immunity, hardly the kind of shield contemplated by a statute designed to fix the rights of a permittee upon a certain date.”

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.

In re Jada B. CA2/3

California Court of Appeal · Jun 22, 2023

James contends that the evidence clearly establishes that he received Jada into his home and held her out as his child within the meaning of section 7611, subdivision (d), and that he was therefore entitled to presumed father … A biological father is a man “ ‘who has established his paternity but has not established his qualification as a presumed parent.’ [Citation.]” (Ibid.)

Kurtin v. Elieff

California Court of Appeal · May 8, 2013

It is well established that the scope of an arbitrator‟s powers are fixed by the agreement to arbitrate. (E.g., Moncharsh v. … To be sure (as shown by sentences one, two and six), the parties clearly wanted their mediated agreement to be enforceable.

Huntingdon Life Sciences, Inc. v. Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty USA, Inc.

29 Cal. Rptr. 3d 521 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 1, 2005

To qualify as a true threat, a communication need not specify who would carry out the threat. … The statute “created a federal immunity to any cause of action that would make interactive service providers liable for information originating with a third party user of the service.”

People v. Deeney

145 Cal. App. 3d 647 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 2, 1983

If the evidence in issue here were only that June said she had been bruised, it may have qualified as a statement of physical condition. … However, evidence of prior bad acts may properly be admitted to establish any fact material for the People or to overcome any material matter sought to be proved by the defense (People v.