Case law

Citizens for Open Access to Sand and Tide, Inc. v. Seadrift Ass'n

60 Cal. App. 4th 1053 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 14, 1998

(Clemmer v. Hartford Insurance Co. (1978) 22 Cal.3d 865, 875 [ 151 Cal.Rptr. 285 , 587 P.2d 1098 ]; see also Brown v. Rahman (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 1458, 1461-1462 [ 282 Cal.Rptr. 815 ]; Ceresino v. Fire Ins. … (D’Amico v. Board of Medical Examiners (1974) 11 Cal.3d 1, 14-15 [ 112 Cal.Rptr. 786 , 520 P.2d 10 ]; Kilgore v. Younger (1982) 30 Cal.3d 770, 784-785 [ 180 Cal.Rptr. 657 , 640 P.2d 793 ]; State Board of Pharmacy v.

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.

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.

Concord Christian Center v. Open Bible Standard Churches

34 Cal. Rptr. 3d 412 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 30, 2005

V, § 1.) … (Singh v.

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.

Kurz v. Syrus Systems, LLC

221 Cal. App. 4th 748 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 22, 2013

(Castleman v. … Kurz v.

California Teachers Ass'n v. Butte Community College District

48 Cal. App. 4th 1293 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 23, 1996

(Greer v. Board of Education (1975) 47 Cal.App.3d 98, 105 [ 121 Cal.Rptr. 542 ].) … (Aylward v. State Board etc. Examiners, supra, 31 Cal.2d at p. 839 .)

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.

County of Butte v. Superior Court

176 Cal. App. 3d 693 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 20, 1985

(Hicks v. Board of Supervisors, supra, 69 Cal.App.3d at p. 235 .) … In Hicks v.

Illinois Midwest Ins. Agency, LLC v. WCAB/Rodriguez

California Court of Appeal · Nov 10, 2025

ADJ11532204) Petitioner, v. WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD and ORLANDO RODRIGUEZ, Respondents. PROCEEDINGS to review a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board. … The Appeals Board described this court’s summary denial of a petition for review in National Cement Co. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd.

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 ].

Finnan v. Bd. of Supervisors of San Joaquin

26 Cal. App. 724 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 9, 1915

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.

George v. Beaty

85 Cal. App. 525 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 21, 1927

Good v. Howard, 174 Ind. 358 [ 92 N. E. 115 ], American Eng. Co. v. Metropolitan By-Products Co., 280 Fed. 677 , St. Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. Messenger, 26 Okl. 590 [ 110 Pac. 893 ], and Double v. … It is said in State 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 ]).

People v. Cain

California Court of Appeal · Dec 8, 2025

(People v. Brown (2023) 14 Cal.5th 530, 536 (Brown).) “Issues of statutory construction are reviewed de novo.” (Brown, supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 536.) … (San Francisco Taxpayers Assn. v. Board of Supervisors (1992) 2 Cal.4th 571, 580.) In his report on Proposition 66, the legislative analyst stated that there are “Two Ways to Challenge Death Sentences.”

McAllister v. County of Monterey

54 Cal. Rptr. 3d 116 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 31, 2007

(Unnamed Physician v. Board of Trustees (2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 607, 619 [ 113 Cal.Rptr.2d 309 ].) B. Exceptions “There are exceptions to the exhaustion doctrine.” (Unnamed Physician v. … (Weil & Brown, Cal. Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial (The Rutter Group 2006) ¶ 7:139, p. 7-53.)

People v. Clark

51 Cal. App. 4th 575 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 21, 1996

There are two problems with the Attorney General’s reliance on Brown under these circumstances. … In Boykin v.