Case law

In Re Marriage of Hasso

229 Cal. App. 3d 1174 · California Court of Appeal · May 2, 1991

Procedure (3d ed. 1985) Appeal, § 161, p. 171; see, e.g., Lee v. Brown (1976) 18 Cal.3d 110, 114 [ 132 Cal.Rptr. 649 , 553 P.2d 1121 ]; Oliver v. Schene (1960) 182 Cal.App.2d 473, 477 [6 *1180 Cal.Rptr. 461].) … (See Epstein v.

Chapman v. Tarentola

187 Cal. App. 2d 22 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 30, 1960

(Primm v. Primm, 46 Cal.2d 690, 696 [ 299 P.2d 231 ] ; Warner v. Warner, 34 Cal.2d 838, 839 [ 215 P.2d 20 ] ; Wilder v. Wilder, 214 Cal. 783, 785 [ 7 P.2d 1032 ] ; Brown v. … (Stewart v. Stewart, supra, 156 Cal. 651, 655 ; Brown v. Brown, supra, 162 Cal.App.2d 314, 319 ] ; Ojena v. Ojena, supra, 154 Cal.App.2d 440, 443 ; Ganann v. Ganann, supra, 109 Cal.App.2d 346, 351 .)

Santee v. Santa Clara County Office of Education

220 Cal. App. 3d 702 · California Court of Appeal · May 18, 1990

(Jackson v. Board of Education (1967) 250 Cal.App.2d 856, 860 [ 58 Cal.Rptr. 763 ] [service of claim on city insufficient where correct public entity was city board of education]; cf. Jamison v. … Board of Education, supra, 250 Cal.App.2d at pp. 858-860; cf. City of San Jose v. Superior Court, supra, 12 Cal.3d at pp. 456-457.) Appellants’ reliance on Bettencourt v.

Anderson v. Thacher

76 Cal. App. 2d 50 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 11, 1946

Brown in which Mr. Brown had said that Mr. Thacher and Mr. … Brown, Thacher “then took the Andersons in charge.”

Carroll v. Interstate Brands Corp.

121 Cal. Rptr. 2d 532 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 28, 2002

Bell v. Shine, Browne & Diamond (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 1011, 1019 [ 43 Cal.Rptr.2d 717 ]; Trimble v. Steinfeldt, supra, 178 Cal.App.3d at p. 651.) … Bell v. Shine, Browne & Diamond, supra, 36 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1019-1020; Valenta v. Regents of University of California, supra, 231 Cal.App.3d at p. 1470 ; Hansen v.

Robinson & Wilson, Inc. v. Stone

35 Cal. App. 3d 396 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 16, 1973

(Genis v. Krasne, 47 Cal.2d 241, 246 [ 302 P.2d 289 ]; Arnold v. Browne, 27 Cal.App.3d 386, 398 [ 103 Cal.Rptr. 775 ].) … Co. v. Brown, 247 Cal.App.2d 564 [ 55 Cal.Rptr. 832 ], in support of their position that attorneys’ fees incurred in litigation are recoverable under the contract provision in question.

Preciado v. County of Ventura

143 Cal. App. 3d 783 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 29, 1982

(Jackson v. City of Sacramento (1981) 117 Cal.App.3d 596, 601-602 [ 172 Cal.Rptr. 826 ]; Summerford v. Board of Retirement (1977) 72 Cal.App.3d 128, 131 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 814 ].) … (Summerford v. Board of Retirement, supra, 72 Cal.App.3d at p. 132 ; Flaherty v. Board of Retirement (1961) 198 Cal.App.2d 397, 404 [ 18 Cal.Rptr. 256 ].)

Ticor Title Insurance v. Rancho Santa Fe Ass'n

177 Cal. App. 3d 726 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 18, 1986

(Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. San Diego County Dist. Council of Carpenters (1979) 25 Cal.3d 317, 330 [ 158 Cal.Rptr. 370 , 599 P.2d 676 ]; White v. Dorfman, supra, 116 Cal.App.3d 892, 897 .) … They could have included additional language in paragraph 165 or an additional paragraph in article V, “Duration, Enforcement, Amendment,” stating the Covenant’s provisions could be changed or modified by the Board acting

Johnson v. Taft School District

19 Cal. App. 2d 405 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 2, 1937

(Saxton v. State Board of Education, 137 Cal. App. 167 [ 29 Pac. (2d) 873]; Bold v. Board of Medical Examiners, 135 Cal. … In Goldsmith v. Board of Education, 66 Cal. App. 157 , at 168 et seq. [ 225 Pac. 783, 787 ], it is said: “The teacher is entrusted with the custody of children and their high preparation for useful life.

Laurelle v. Bush

17 Cal. App. 409 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 8, 1911

(Barnes v. Miner, 122 Fed. 480, 487 .) … (Goytino v. McAleer, 4 Cal. App. 655 , [ 88 Pac. 992 ].)

People v. Gates

41 Cal. App. 3d 590 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 5, 1974

DeWitt v. Board of Supervisors, 53 Cal.2d 419, 424 [ 2 Cal.Rptr. 1 , 348 P.2d 567 ]; Guy F. Atkinson Co. v. Offner, 86 Cal.App.2d 92 [ 194 P.2d 33 ].) The principle above applies to the situation involved here. … In City of Los Angeles v.

Civil Service Commission v. Superior Court

63 Cal. App. 3d 627 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 9, 1976

(McPheeters v. Board of Medical Examiners, 74 Cal.App.2d 46 [ 168 P.2d 65 ].) And see Dare v. Board of Medical Examiners, 21 Cal.2d 790, 794 [ 136 P.2d 304 ].” (Pp. 420-421.) … (Rucker v. Superior Court, supra; Kaufman v. Brown, 106 Cal.App.2d 686, 688-689 [ 235 P.2d 632 ]; Legg v. Superior Court, 156 Cal.App.2d 723, 724-725 [ 320 P.2d 227 ]; Agnew v.

Talbott v. Csakany

199 Cal. App. 3d 700 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 15, 1988

The court in Brown v. Harkleroad (1956) 39 Tenn.App. 657 [ 287 S.W.2d 92, 96 ], expressed the same concern in denying liability. … .) *704 In support of its conclusion, Brown v. Harkleroad, supra, 287 S.W.2d at pages 95-96, cites Estes v.

Terhune v. Superior Court

76 Cal. Rptr. 2d 841 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 24, 1998

(Kansas v. … (California Teachers Assn. v.

Ward v. County of Riverside

273 Cal. App. 2d 353 · California Court of Appeal · May 23, 1969

In Johnston v. … In the case of County of Contra Costa v.

Reardon v. City of Daly City

71 Cal. App. 2d 759 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 26, 1945

(Steen v. Board of Civil Service Commrs., 26 Cal.2d 716 [160 P.2d 816]; Swars v. Council of the City of Vallejo, 64 Cal.App.2d 858 [ 149 P.2d 397 ] ; Walker v. … (Metcalf v. County of Los Angeles, 24 Cal.2d 267 [ 148 P.2d 645 ] ; Alexander v. State Personnel Board, 22 Cal.2d 198 [ 137 P.2d 433 ]; Abelleira v.

Golden Door Properties v. Co. of San Diego

California Court of Appeal · Sep 28, 2018

Chatten-Brown & Carstens, Jan Chatten-Brown, and Joshua Randall Chatten- Brown for Plaintiff and Respondent Sierra Club. Latham & Watkins, Andrew D. Yancey, Samantha K. Seikkula and Christopher W. … (Vineyard, at pp. 426, 435; Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 564 [courts "scrupulously enforce all legislatively mandated CEQA requirements"].)

Branches Neighborhood Corp. v. CalAtlantic Group, Inc.

California Court of Appeal · Aug 24, 2018

(Sargon Enterprises, Inc. v. Browne George Ross LLP (2017) 15 Cal.App.5th 749, 765.) The question, then, is whether that principle applies to the instant case. … (See, e.g., Board of Education v. Round Valley Teachers Assn. (1996) 13 Cal.4th 269; Ahdout v. Hekmatjah (2013) 213 Cal.App.4th 21; Jordan v. Department of Motor Vehicles (2002) 100 Cal.App.4th 431; City of Palo Alto v.

Krausen v. Solano County Junior College District

42 Cal. App. 3d 394 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 8, 1974

(Otto v. Davie (1973) 34 Cal.App.3d 570, 575 [ 110 Cal.Rptr. 114 ].) … Code, § 54956; Lucas v. Board of Trustees (1971) 18 Cal.App.3d 988 [ 96 Cal.Rptr. 431 ].)

Borges v. Hillman

29 Cal. App. 144 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 11, 1915

(Borges v. Dunham, 169 Cal. 83 , [ 145 Pac. 1011 ].) … (See Naftzger v. Gregg, 99 Cal. 83 , [ 37 Am. St. Rep. 23 , 33 Pac. 757 ]; In re Blythe’s Estate, 99 Cal. 472 , [34 Pac. 108]; Story v. Story & I. Commercial Co., 100 Cal. 41 , [ 34 Pac. 675 ]; Brown v.