Case law

McGlone v. Mt. Diablo Unified School District

3 Cal. App. 3d 17 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 29, 1969

Thornton v. Board of Trustees (1968) 262 Cal.App.2d 761, 765 [ 68 Cal.Rptr. 842 ].) … (Griggs v. Board of Trustees, 61 Cal.2d 93, 96 [ 37 Cal.Rptr. 194 , 389 P.2d 722 ]; italics added.) In Raney v.

Chapman v. City of Fullerton

90 Cal. App. 463 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 29, 1928

A. 444, 51 Pac. 1085 ]; Jenkins v. Williams, 14 Cal. App. 89 [ 111 Pac. 16 ]), and consequently the board of trustees was not empowered to suspend its operation or ignore its effect (South Yuba Water Co. v. … (Osburn v. Stone, 170 Cal. 480 [ 150 Pac. 367 ]; Times Pub. Co. v. Weatherby, 139 Cal. 618 [ 73 Pac. 465 ]; Gamewell etc. Co. v. Los Angeles, 45 Cal. App. 149 [ 187 Pac. 163 ].)

Stafford v. Riverside County

155 Cal. App. 2d 474 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 22, 1957

Also, the same allegations are made in the claim to the board of supervisors and board of equalization. … Wood Lumber Co. v.

Hickman-Coleman Co. v. Leggett

10 Cal. App. 29 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 5, 1909

(McKee v. Hunt, 142 Cal. 526 , [ 77 Pac. 1103 ]; Estate of Scott, 1 Cal. App. 742 , [ 83 Pac. 85 ]; Maxon v. Jones, 128 Cal. 77 , [ 60 Pac. 516 ]; Sterritt v. Barker, 119 Cal. 495 , [ 51 Pac. 695 ]; Briggs v. … Brown, who was both able and willing to complete said purchase.

Davis v. Milligan

166 Cal. App. 2d 404 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 19, 1958

As stated in Robinson v. … I pay no rent for the service station property at Brown and Midway in Durham. The only consideration for my use of the above service station property is that I buy my gasoline and the oil Mr. Milligan sells from him.

Jamison v. State of California

31 Cal. App. 3d 513 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 9, 1973

(Jackson v. Board of Education, 250 Cal.App.2d 856, 858-859 [ 58 Cal.Rptr. 763 ].) … In Stone v.

California State Employees'assn. v. St. of Calif.

32 Cal. App. 3d 103 · California Court of Appeal · May 4, 1973

(Gol dberg v. … (Myers v. English, supra.)

Hutchings v. Southwestern Automobile Insurance

96 Cal. App. 318 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 17, 1929

Plaintiff was the owner of an automobile which he sold to one Brown on an installment contract. … See, also, Coniglio v. Connecticut Fire Ins. Co., 180 Cal. 596, 599 [5 A. L. R. 805; 182 Pac. 275 ]; Sharp v. Scottish Union etc. Co., 136 Cal. 542, 545 [ 69 Pac. 253 ]; 14 Cal. Jur. 522. In the case of Coniglio v.

People v. Schmidt

33 Cal. App. 426 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 16, 1917

This machine consisted of a “tattoo” clock attached tó a board,' to which board was also attached a dry battery. … Brown, 148 Cal. 743 , [ 84 Pac. 204 ].

In Re Cleaver

266 Cal. App. 2d 143 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 27, 1968

(See In re Brown, supra, 67 Cal.2d 339, 341 ; People v. … (In re Brown, supra, 67 Cal.2d 339, 341-342 ; In re Schoengarth, supra, at pp. 302 and 304; People v.

People v. Thompson

36 Cal. App. 4th 843 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 13, 1995

Fred Lopez, who worked at the Contractor’s State License Board, also testified the Riddle contract was a fixed price contract. … (People v.

Wells Fargo Bank v. Ricker

269 Cal. App. 2d 526 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 7, 1969

(See United States v. du Pont & Co., 353 U.S. 586 [ 1 L.Ed.2d 1057 , 77 S.Ct. 872 ]; United States v. du Pont & Co., 366 U.S. 316, 334 [ 6 L.Ed. 2d 318, 330 , 81 S.Ct. 1243 ]; United States v. du Pont, Final Judgment Action … (See People v. White, 85 Cal.App. 241, 254 [ 259 P. 76 ], citing 18 C.J..1406.)

California Adult Authority v. Superior Court

266 Cal. App. 2d 143 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 27, 1968

(See In re Brown, supra, 67 Cal.2d 339, 341 ; People v. … (In re Brown, supra, 67 Cal.2d 339, 341-342 ; In re Schoengarth, supra, at pp. 302 and 304; People v.

Salmon v. Allen

1 Cal. App. 2d 115 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 27, 1934

(Blalock v. … App. 225 [ 296 Pac. 925 ] ; Steele v. Board of Trustees, 121 Cal. App. 419 [ 9 Pac. (2d) 217 ]).

Town of Los Gatos v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Board CA6

California Court of Appeal · May 21, 2021

ADJ9478055) Petitioner, v. WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and CHARLES HART, Respondents. … Town of Los Gatos et al. v. Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board No. H048333

American Distilling Co. v. Johnson

132 Cal. App. 2d 73 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 1, 1955

The courts take judicial notice *77 of the rules of the board. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1875, subd. 3; Anders v. State Board of Equalization, 82 Cal.App.2d 88, 98 [ 185 P.2d 883 ].) … It has been held in San Francisco Brewing Corp. v.

Strong v. Beydoun

166 Cal. App. 4th 1398 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 19, 2008

. *1403 In Huskinson & Brown v. … (Huskinson & Brown v. Wolf, supra, 32 Cal.4th at p. 463 .)

Lorry v. Englander Drayage & Warehouse Co.

108 Cal. App. 116 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 6, 1930

and this would have been a question properly to be left to the jury (Ivancich v. … Davies, 186 Cal. 520 [ 199 Pac. 784 ]; Strong v. Olsen, 74 Cal. App. 518 [ 241 Pac. 107 ]).

Reimel v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Bd.

254 Cal. App. 2d 340 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 15, 1967

(Harris v. Alcoholic Beverage etc. Appeals Board, 223 Cal.App.2d 563, 566-568 [ 35 Cal.Rptr. 865 ].) … (See Alexander v. State Personnel Board, 22 Cal. 2d 198, 199-200 [ 137 P.2d 433 ] ; Anderson v.

Oro Fino Glod Mining Corp. v. County of El Dorado

225 Cal. App. 3d 872 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 5, 1990

(Friends of Mammoth v. Board of Supervisors (1972) 8 Cal.3d 247, 259 [ 104 Cal.Rptr. 761 , 502 P.2d 1049 ]; see also Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. … While mere concern does not constitute admissible evidence (see Perley v. Board of Supervisors, supra, 137 Cal.App.3d at pp. 433-437), there were some factors the Board could consider.