Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.30s
235 Cal. App. 3d 1 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 16, 1991
A customer list is one of the types of information which can qualify as a trade secret. (American Paper & Packaging Products, Inc. v. Kirgan (1986) 183 Cal.App.3d 1318, 1323-1324 [ 228 Cal.Rptr. 713 ].) … Any preliminary or permanent injunction issued in this case in the future shall both clearly and narrowly define the scope of the proscribed activities, in accordance with the views expressed in this opinion.
Cited 61 timesPublishedTahoe Regional Planning Agency v. King
233 Cal. App. 3d 1365 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 6, 1991
In reversing, the Fourth Circuit held that there is no black-letter rule which immunizes a land-use ordinance from a takings challenge simply because it contains an amortization period. … The second is clearly commercial. 32 Defendants did not stipulate to this but acknowledged that TRPA would present evidence to this effect.
Cited 15 timesPublishedCalifornia Court of Appeal · Nov 7, 2013
We dispose of the petition by separate order. 5 established he did so. … Defendant has not persuaded us there is any basis for disturbing the jury’s verdict. “ ‘Before a judgment of conviction can be set aside for insufficiency of the evidence to support the trier of fact’s verdict, it must clearly
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedMadian v. City of Stanton CA4/3
California Court of Appeal · Jun 17, 2014
But, said the trial judge, respondeat superior clearly does not apply to section 1983 causes of action. … That document clearly left issues for further consideration beyond mere compliance.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedCalifornia Court of Appeal · Oct 30, 2014
Because the law clearly establishes that service in an alternative work release program does not qualify for section 4019 credits, and the record in these proceedings reflects that the trial court left the award of such credits
Cited 0 timesUnpublished6 Cal. App. 5th 1188 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 22, 2016
On the other hand, the portion of the condition requiring that defendant report ―any contacts with . . . any peace officer‖ is vague and overbroad and does indeed leave one to guess what sorts of events and interactions qualify … We disagree with the People‘s argument that the condition is clearly not triggered when defendant says ―hello‖ to a police officer or attends an event at which police officers are present, but would be triggered if defendant
Cited 81 timesPublished189 Cal. App. 4th 277 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 30, 2010
She testified that because of her poor credit history, the lender recommended she agree to the quitclaim so she and Ron could qualify for a better interest rate. … The Court of Appeal held that the trial court erred by refusing to apply the presumption, because the husband clearly gained an advantage when the wife quitclaimed her interest to him.
Cited 28 timesPublished172 Cal. App. 4th 1268 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 26, 2009
R[.W.] has had behavior problems at school at least since kindergarten when first qualified for Special Education due to Emotional Disturbance. … Mother argues the evidence was insufficient to establish an order limiting parents' educational rights was necessary to protect R.W. Mother contends the motion was "based on the simple fact that . . .
Cited 0 timesPublishedCalifornia Court of Appeal · Dec 10, 2013
And they can consider the immunity agreement. [¶] Also I think it goes to the special instruction that the People have requested, that whole issue about his immunity and the possibility that he could be found in contempt … It was also told to consider whether the witness was promised immunity or leniency.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedMcGuire v. More-Gas Invistment, LLC
220 Cal. App. 4th 512 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 15, 2013
Summary judgment is granted when a moving party establishes the right to the entry of judgment as a matter of law. [Citation.] … We held that these charges, which did not qualify as proper liquidated damages pursuant to Civil Code section 1671, constituted illegal penalties.
Cited 17 timesPublished45 Cal. App. 4th 133 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 9, 1996
That exchange establishes nothing more than a willingness to consider future loan applications and does not establish a fraudulent promise to make a loan. (See Kruse v. … Puglia, P.J., and Morrison, J., concurred. 1 A maritime chassis is a skeletal trailer onto which a cargo container from a ship may be placed for transport over land. 2 In order to qualify as a woman-owned business under federal
Cited 73 timesPublishedCalifornia Court of Appeal · Nov 18, 2016
Contreras Cannot Establish a Probability of Prevailing on her Claim. … Clearly, that is not the situation before us. 15 As the Restatement explains, “The lawyer’s efforts in a representation must be for the benefit of the client [citation].
Cited 0 timesPublished186 Cal. App. 3d 780 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 23, 1986
It listed the lot size as 50 feet by 100 feet, but an attached scale drawing of the plant clearly showed the facility, with its attached loading dock, to be *784 greater than 50 feet wide. … Rptr. 628 ] states: "`It is well established in California, moreover, that such damages may include loss of anticipated profits where an established business has been injured.'"
Overruled by Bily v. Arthur Young & Co., 3 Cal. 4th 370 (1992)Cited 33 timesPublished58 Cal. App. 3d 290 · California Court of Appeal · May 14, 1976
This clearly represents the out-of-pocket loss under the established rules discussed herein. … VI appears clearly now to be moot. *319 VII. Were Compensatory Damages Improperly Calculated?
Cited 23 timesPublishedPeople Ex Rel. Van De Kamp v. American Art Enterprises, Inc.
75 Cal. App. 3d 523 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 30, 1977
The court at pages 680 and 681 said: "[I]t may be true that the phraseology of the section is more consonant with the old-fashioned houses of ill fame of the `crib house' variety [citation], the legislative intent is clearly … [The nature of the business conducted by] American Art Enterprises [gives it] no special status or immunity." (Italics added.)
Cited 9 timesPublishedCalifornia Court of Appeal · Jul 31, 2014
As to Sindaha’s assertion the qualifying sexual offenses were too remote to establish he currently suffers from a mental disorder, we disagree. … Sindaha concedes his 1985 and 1995 convictions properly establish the qualifying prior sexual offenses, but he complains they are of little if any evidentiary value on the issue of his current mental state.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished238 Cal. App. 4th 794 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 14, 2015
Howard concluded that the aberrant behavior exhibited by appellant on February 19, 2012, was more likely the result of either drug-induced psychosis or drug-induced delirium: ―I DO NOT believe that [appellant‘s] established … Addiction to or abuse of drugs or intoxicants, by itself, does not qualify as legal insanity.
Cited 25 timesPublishedCalifornia Court of Appeal · Apr 25, 2023
“To qualify [Thomas’s] success as moderate is fallacious.” After establishing the lodestar amount, the trial court turned its attention to whether a multiplier should be applied. … The employee must establish that he is a “qualified individual,” i.e., an employee who can perform the essential functions of the job with or without reasonable accommodation. (Green v.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished19 Cal. Rptr. 3d 1 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 6, 2004
Beringer proposes to establish a 1,424,400-square-foot facility on the site. 1,167,590 square feet of the facility will be used for warehousing and storing wine. … Subdivision B qualifies that provision, providing upon request at the hearing by the appellant or any interested party, and a showing of good cause, the board may permit additional evidence to be presented which could have
Cited 54 timesPublishedCalifornia Court of Appeal · Nov 26, 2024
Mimran’s testimony established there was a reasonable certainty plaintiff would need a permanent DRG stimulator. … Macias (2024) 102 Cal.App.5th 740, 752.) “ ‘While there is no clearly established definition of “reasonable certainty,” evidence of future detriment has been held sufficient based on expert medical opinion which considered
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna