Case law

Carroll v. Puritan Leasing Co.

77 Cal. App. 3d 481 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 8, 1978

Appellant admits, the resulting judgment in the prior action is not qualified by any stated limitation that it be satisfied only out of community property. … The nature and substance of a cause of action are determined by the right or liability sought to be established or enforced.

Cal-Farm Insurance v. TAC Exterminators, Inc.

172 Cal. App. 3d 564 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 25, 1985

The absence of liability could be easily established but the costs of defense would have fallen to Allstate as it had promised to defend any suit against Val’s Painting even if the allegations of the suit were groundless. … contract does not include a contract to indemnify such as the one alleged here. 8 As to Gera Thole’s coverage by TAC’s insurance policy, under definitions the policy states: “ ‘insured’ means any person or organization qualifying

Bell v. Farmers Insurance Exchange

105 Cal. Rptr. 2d 59 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 5, 2001

But they do make sense as establishing particular limitations on the scope of the phrase. … The undisputed evidence establishes that claims adjusting is the sole mission of the 70 branch claims offices where plaintiffs worked.

Boelts v. City of Lake Forest

25 Cal. Rptr. 3d 164 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 24, 2005

Section 33500 cannot be used to immunize an agency which adopts a redevelopment plan legal on its face, then after the 60-day period has elapsed deviates from its resolved purpose and seeks to violate the public use requirement … There is no authority offered for this statement, though there is a footnote qualifying it for cases (see §§ 33031, 33354.6) when new territory is added. (Appellant’s opening brief at p. 19.)

Lindsey v. Brown

166 Cal. App. 2d 4 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 10, 1958

Here a prima facie case of due execution was established upon the preliminary proof (Swift v. … Appellants complain of the use of the qualifying clauses “if you find” or “if it arises” in its explanation of the law governing undue influence.

Superior Strut & Hanger Co. v. Port of Oakland

72 Cal. App. 3d 987 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 29, 1977

We conclude, therefore, that section 7262 as it was amended in 1971 requires mandatory relocation payments to qualified persons who are displaced after July 1, 1972. … Thus the court below was entitled to consider the applicable limitations period as that established in the relocation guidelines.

Stanton & Sons v. County of Los Angeles

78 Cal. App. 2d 181 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 20, 1947

the consular certificates of origin describe the shipments by board feet, grade and variety; (5) the absence of an address from each board and the manner of transporting the lumber as an aggregation of goods—-these facts establish … In each of those cases it is made clearly to appear that the imported merchandise was taxed after United States customs duties had been paid and while the merchandise lay in the warehouse of the importer, either in the same

People v. Stewart CA3

California Court of Appeal · Jul 16, 2015

The trial court found Johnson did not qualify as an expert witness and her relationship with defendant at the time in question was insufficient to qualify her as an intimate acquaintance. … What the meaning of the term ‘intimate acquaintance’ is has not been clearly defined.

People v. Stephen

182 Cal. App. 3d 1230 · California Court of Appeal · May 1, 1986

The imposition of such restraints clearly reflects the Legislature's intent to circumscribe the exercise of discretion by the trial court in approving civil compromises. … Loss of profits qualify as recoverable special damages. ( Id., at pp. 118, 121.)

People v. West CA3

California Court of Appeal · Mar 5, 2025

This, the People argued, “clearly demonstrates that defendant[’]s personal reasons for not registering as a sex offender were physical rather than mental health issues.” … There is no dispute that defendant had a qualifying mental disorder.

O'MARY v. Mitsubishi Electronics America, Inc.

59 Cal. App. 4th 563 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 25, 1997

Inherent in the very fact that the case got to the jury at all was that the evidence established a prima facie case. … ’Mary’s discharge was because of his age, Mitsubishi could still show that it “had a reason other than age” for its actions. 10 As between the competing instructions, the one chosen by the judge, while more complex, was clearly

Lingenfelter v. County of Fresno

64 Cal. Rptr. 3d 378 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 16, 2007

Appellants say the words `in a trial by jury' qualify the phrase `after the plaintiff has completed his opening statement,' just as they qualify the phrase `the presentation of evidence,' with the result that the right to … Clearly, the Legislature needs to act to make its interpretation known. Conditions imposed by courts to soften the drastic consequences of failed attempts at an opening statement are not satisfactory. (See Panico v.

Mabudian v. Beaver Medical Group CA4/1

California Court of Appeal · Aug 20, 2024

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Cody was insured under an Anthem health plan when she began receiving treatment for an immune system condition. Anthem assigned Beaver to be Cody’s medical provider. … Cody argues in her response, among other things, that BMG failed to meet its burden of establishing her alleged arbitration agreement with Anthem is valid under section 1363.1.

Dziubla v. Piazza

California Court of Appeal · Dec 29, 2020

Given the consistent references to the lawsuit, we are unable to find anything that would qualify as an indisputable threat under Penal Code section 422. (See People v. … Plaintiffs have not conclusively established such a threat.

Windham v. Board of Medical Quality Assurance

104 Cal. App. 3d 461 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 28, 1980

Thus, the Board found that respondent had started to study a new specialty in California when he arrived here in 1972, that he had become Board qualified in that specialty, that he makes many appearances as an expert witness … Clearly, the charitable work respondent is *474 to do as a condition of probation is right in line with the purpose of the proceedings below.

Save the Plastic Bag Coalition v. City of Manhattan Beach

181 Cal. App. 4th 521 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 27, 2010

Wadden stated: "Clearly [the California Environmental Quality Act] applies .... We never argued that it wasn't a project. I think it clearly is a project ...." … Monterey County Bd. of Supervisors, supra, 222 Cal.App.3d at p. 1347 .) [¶] ... [¶] If the project does not qualify for a negative declaration . . ., `the third step in the process is to prepare a full environmental impact

Gillis v. Sun Insurance Office, Ltd.

238 Cal. App. 2d 408 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 26, 1965

It being established that Kingston Trio, Inc. was entitled to the benefits of the policy as the intended insured, no issue is or can be raised concerning the established assignment of the claim to plaintiff. (See Ins. … Co. (1964) 225 Cal.App.2d 275 [ 37 Cal.Rptr. 303 ], wherein the policy used the same qualifying words which have been emphasized above in describing the peril— “ ‘direct loss to the property covered caused by: ... 15.

Taggares v. Superior Court

62 Cal. App. 4th 94 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 13, 1998

The Legislature also authorized the courts to establish responsibility for the fee. … While JAMS undoubtedly is a qualified service, it is only one of several competing private entrepreneurs in this market.

People v. Barney

8 Cal. App. 4th 798 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 5, 1992

(2) the witness furnishing such testimony must be properly qualified as an expert to give an opinion on the subject. … Clearly, a match of DNA patterns is a matter of substantial significance.

Hart v. Browne

103 Cal. App. 3d 947 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 31, 1980

Such a misrepresentation of opinion is actionable when the declarant holds himself out to be specially qualified in the area on which he gives the opinion. (Harazim v. … Reliance on his opinion was clearly a normal consequence of the situation.