Case law

Brooks v. Stewart

97 Cal. App. 2d 385 · California Court of Appeal · May 5, 1950

McFadden, 81 Cal. 489 [ 22 P. 851 , 15 Am.St.Rep. 66 ] ; Cooley’s Constitutional Limitations, 8th ed., pp. 227-8; Board of Law Library Trustees v. … The motives of the members of the board of supervisors at the time of passing an ordinance are immaterial on the question of the validity of the ordinance. (Dobbins v.

Ames v. City of Pasadena

167 Cal. App. 2d 510 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 2, 1959

(See Miller v. … (Jackson v. City of San Mateo (1957), 148 Cal.App.2d 667 [ 307 P.2d 451 ].) Finally, it is to be observed as pointed out in Steiger v.

Davis v. City of San Diego

131 Cal. Rptr. 2d 266 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 3, 2003

(Press v. … (Dibb v.

People v. Jordan

115 Cal. App. 2d 452 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 21, 1953

Baer testified further that appellant Jordan wore a brown hat with the brim turned up, a brown suit, and shirt with open collar, and that Petree and Peterson wore sport clothes. … (People v. Harper, 25 Cal.2d 862, 877 [ 156 P.2d 249 ]; People v. Negra, 208 Cal. 64, 69 [ 280 P. 354 ]; People v. Griffin, 98 Cal.App.2d 1, 25 [ 219 P.2d 519 ]; People v.

County of Riverside v. Yawman & Erbe Manufacturing Co.

3 Cal. App. 691 · California Court of Appeal · May 31, 1906

Nor have we involved here any such question as was involved in Swasey v. … It was the peculiar province of the board to pass upon the questions of fact involved in this purchase and having determined the same, it cannot be assailed collaterally. (County of Alameda v.

Pratt v. Security Trust & Savings Bank

15 Cal. App. 2d 630 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 27, 1936

(Cannon v. Stephens, 18 Del. Ch. 276 [ 159 Atl. 234, 236, 237 ] ; Attorney-General v. Clark, 167 Mass. 201 [ 45 N. E. 183 ] ; Fithian Night School v. College Board, 88 N. J. … The fact that the attorney-general and the members of the board of park commissioners are joined as parties defendant is of no import. (Dickey v. Volker, 321 Mo. 235 [ 11 S. W. (2d) 278 , 62 A. L. R. 858]; Smith v.

Hamilton v. Stockton Unified School District

245 Cal. App. 2d 944 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 27, 1966

Assn. v. … He asks to have his salary restored with interest besides the right to his retirement and other benefits (see Mass v. Board of Education, 61 Cal.2d 612 [ 39 Cal.Rptr. 739 , 394 P. 579 ]; Titus v.

Stevens v. Fox Realty Corp.

23 Cal. App. 3d 199 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 31, 1972

(Lindell Co. v. Board of Permit Appeals *207 (1943) 23 Cal.2d 303, 315 [ 144 P.2d 4 ]; Jacobs v. Board of Supervisors (1893) 100 Cal. 121, 128-129 [ 34 P. 630 ]; Spear v. … Board of Medical Examiners (1956) 146 Cal.App.2d 207, 212-213 [ 303 P.2d 886 ]; Broyles v. Carter (1956) 142 Cal.App.2d 647, 650 [ 299 P.2d 299 ]; Patten v.

Boehm v. County of Merced

163 Cal. App. 3d 447 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 7, 1985

However, section 17001 requires that the board adopt the standards of aid and care, and City and County of San Francisco v. … (Sharick v. Galloway (1936) 12 Cal.App.2d 733 [ 55 P.2d 1196 ]. See also Jaques v. Board of Supervisors (1913) 22 Cal.App. 621 [ 135 P. 686 ]; Jarkieh v. Badagliacco (1945) 68 Cal.App.2d 426 [ 156 P.2d 969 ].)

Santiago v. Employee Benefits Services

168 Cal. App. 3d 898 · California Court of Appeal · May 30, 1985

In addition, the Appeals Board has the authority to impose successive penalties for successive delays in payment. ( Gallamore v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1979) 23 Cal.3d 815, 823 [ 153 Cal. … Such conduct is clearly within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Appeals Board. ( Ibid.; Depew v. Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co., supra, 135 Cal. App.3d at pp. 577-579.)

Victor Valley Transit Authority v. Wcab

100 Cal. Rptr. 2d 235 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 11, 2000

100 Cal.Rptr.2d 235 (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 1068 VICTOR VALLEY TRANSIT AUTHORITY et al., Petitioners, v. WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and James Sophy et al., Respondents. County of San Bernardino, Petitioner, v. … Co. v.

People v. Wright

52 Cal. App. 4th 203 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 13, 1996

Brown” and “unlawfully, and by means of force and fear [took] personal property from the person of . . . Moore.” (Italics added.) … (People v. Carter (1969) 275 Cal.App.2d 815, 823-24 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 202 ]; People v. Duncan (1945) 72 Cal.App.2d 423, 426 [ 164 P.2d 510 ]; People v.

Hanna v. Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department

125 Cal. Rptr. 2d 686 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 17, 2002

In Phillips v. … County of Fresno, supra, 225 Cal.App.3d at page 1245 . 5 Phillips v. County of Fresno, supra, 225 Cal.App.3d at page 1247 . 6 Phillips v. County of Fresno, supra, 225 Cal.App.3d at page 1256 . 7 Phillips v.

McCarthy v. City of Oakland

60 Cal. App. 2d 546 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 24, 1943

(Brooks v. Pension Board, 30 Cal. App.2d 118 [ 85 P.2d 956 ]; Carr v. Fire Commission, 30 Cal.App.2d 208 [ 85 P.2d 959 ]; Jordan v. Retirement Board, supra; Murphy v. … (Klench v. Board of Pension Fund Commrs., supra; O’Dea v. Cook, supra; Jordan v. Retirement Board, supra; Sweesy v. L. A. etc. Retirement Bd., supra; Brooks v. Pension Bd., supra; Casserly v.

Lexin v. City of San Diego

222 Cal. App. 4th 662 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 23, 2013

(BreakZone Billiards v. … (Shirey v.

Jaffee v. Psychology Examining Committee

92 Cal. App. 3d 160 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 20, 1979

(Creelman v. State Board of Registration for Arch. (1968) 73 Wn.2d 298 , 438 P.2d 215 , 217.) … The court is not a super examining board (Nemer v.

Hunt v. County of Shasta

225 Cal. App. 3d 432 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 19, 1990

Citing Chavez v. … (Sofias v. Bank of America, supra, 172 Cal.App.3d at p. 586 ; Davis v.

Chambers v. Davis

131 Cal. App. 500 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 28, 1933

(Dutart v. Woodward, 99 Cal. App. 736 [ 279 Pac. 493 .].) … The board had no power to deprive her of that vested right. (Sec. 5.500, School Code; Owens v. Board of Education, 68 Cal. App. 403 [ 229 Pac. 881, 882 ].

Hochfelder v. County of Los Angeles

126 Cal. App. 2d 370 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 30, 1954

Co. v. Los Angeles, 207 Cal. 430, 437 [ 278 P. 1028 ]; Western Salt Co. v. City of San, Diego, 181 Cal. 696 [ 186 P. 345 ].) … Co. v. Los Angeles, supra; Arbios v. San Bernardino County, 110 Cal. 553, 555 [ 42 P. 1080 ].)

San Luis Obispo Bay Properties, Inc. v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.

28 Cal. App. 3d 556 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 6, 1972

and since 1969, he has remained on the board of directors and served as chairman of the executive committee. … In Jones v. Brown, 13 Cal.App.3d 513, 519 [ 89 Cal.Rptr. 651 ], the court stated: “We observe further that the valid waiver of a right presupposes an actual and demonstrable knowledge of the very right being waived.”