Case law

In Re Black

124 Cal. Rptr. 2d 835 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 18, 2002

Determinate Sentencing Act] serve the entire sentence imposed by the court, except for a reduction in the time served in the custody of the Director of Corrections for performance in work, training or education programs established … Rather, it maintains that "the 15 [percent] credit limitation should apply at a minimum to all offenses sentenced consecutively to or concurrently with a qualifying violent felony.

Higginson v. Kia Motors America

California Court of Appeal · Feb 3, 2026

And in April 2021, Higginson’s counsel deposed Kia’s “person most qualified.” … I would hold Higginson has not established prejudice even if the court wrongly denied him a new trial.

Interstate Marina Development Co. v. County of Los Angeles

155 Cal. App. 3d 435 · California Court of Appeal · May 7, 1984

Such rational basis is clearly present here. In addition to being reasonable, the County rent law was also necessary. … Otherwise, one would be able to obtain immunity from state regulation by making private contractual arrangements.

People v. Ibanez

90 Cal. Rptr. 2d 536 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 29, 1999

Here, there is clearly no new evidence, and the only contention is the legal contention of whether the law requires defendant to be advised of potential civil commitment proceedings under the SVPA. … Indeed, as the People argue, defendant may not even qualify as a sexually violent predator under the SVPA. [15] Although defendant, by virtue of his plea and admissions, may be automatically referred for an initial screening

Katayama v. Continental Investment Group CA4/3

California Court of Appeal · Oct 9, 2024

. [¶] (b) Each answer shall: [¶] (1) Admit so much of the matter involved in the request as is true, either as expressed in the request itself or as reasonably 8 and clearly qualified … If an objection is based on a claim of privilege, the particular privilege invoked shall be clearly stated.

Housing Authority of City of Los Angeles v. Workers'comp. Appeals Bd.

60 Cal. App. 4th 1076 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 14, 1998

An opinion and order of the Appeals Board qualifies as such an administrative determination. (Unruh v. Truck Insurance Exchange (1972) 7 Cal.3d 616, 633 [ 102 Cal.Rptr. 815 , 498 P.2d 1063 ]; Rymer v. … Housing Authority, thereby establishing privity under the third prong of the collateral estoppel test. We suspect that, by drawing a distinction between a police chief and a police officer, the L.A.

Peirce v. Peirce

243 Cal. App. 2d 330 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 6, 1966

‘It would be better practice to have that determination clearly and concisely made by the trial court when it renders the decree of divorce. Considerable confusion and uncertainty could be avoided in that fashion. … At that time she held and still holds a certificate which qualifies her to teach in the elementary schools. She stopped teaching school in 1929, the year in which she was married.

People v. Trujillo

154 Cal. App. 3d 1077 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 25, 1984

Viewed in the light most favorable to the judgment, as required by the usual rule governing appellate review, the evidence herein established that on August 28, 1981, Paul Sanchez was managing a hotel in Huntington Beach. … I understand you qualify for the services of the public defender, and Rita Harris is available. You have requested that I appoint some specific private lawyers.

Dept. of Alcoholic Beverage Control v. Alcoholic Beverage etc.

California Court of Appeal · Aug 17, 2022

Or, the retailer could have just asked for the remaining parts and nothing in the campaign parameters established by [Bogle] would have prohibited this.” … (Ibid.)3 The Department’s interpretation of its own rules is entitled to deference and a reviewing court generally will not depart from that interpretation unless it is clearly erroneous or unauthorized.

Halajian v. D & B Towing

209 Cal. App. 4th 1 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 4, 2012

He argues that the right to travel on highways is clearly established and that he was relying on United States Supreme Court rulings when he was traveling on the highway without a state-issued driver’s license. 1. … These California Supreme Court cases establish that the registration requirement furthers legitimate public interests.

In Re Marriage of Roe

18 Cal. App. 4th 1483 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 20, 1993

This preference, however, is qualified by subdivision (d) which states that the section "establishes neither a preference nor a presumption for or against joint legal custody, joint physical custody, or sole custody, but … The statement of decision clearly states that father had no burden to prove detriment to M.

People v. Morales

California Court of Appeal · Nov 27, 2018

Our standard of review is well established. … The evidence in Mansell clearly supported an inference of lewd intent.

Desai v. Choudhury CA2/2

California Court of Appeal · Oct 14, 2015

The claim, therefore, clearly arises from 4 Under the statute, an act in furtherance of the right of petition or free speech includes: “(1) any written or oral statement or writing made before a legislative, executive … In opposing the Group 1 plaintiffs’ anti-SLAPP motion, Desai established that the FACC had at least minimal merit.

Estate of Justesen

91 Cal. Rptr. 2d 574 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 30, 1999

An attorney is best qualified to advise you about these matters. You should clearly understand the following: [¶] ... [¶] 2. INVENTORY OF ESTATE PROPERTY [¶] ... [¶] c. … Where the statutory time period is exceeded, the personal representative has the burden to establish additional time was reasonably required.

Saunders v. Super. Ct.

California Court of Appeal · Jun 12, 2017

But Copley Press recognized “that not every document used and maintained by the courts clearly falls into one of these two categories. … But Pantos also held that completed juror questionnaires used by the commissioner to determine whether citizens were qualified for jury service need not be disclosed.

Ordorica v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board

105 Cal. Rptr. 2d 123 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 14, 2001

However, this presumption shall not apply where both parties select qualified medical examiners.” 9 Title 8, section 9785, subdivision (b) states in relevant part, “There shall be no more than one primary treating physician … However, Tenet/Centinela subsequently found Title 8, section 9785, subdivision (b) compatible with the statutory scheme, and although a WCAB panel decision is authority for the WCAB’s interpretation unless clearly erroneous

Kajeh v. Select Portfolio Servicing CA4/1

California Court of Appeal · May 14, 2014

Unlike the plaintiff in Aceves, Kajeh's belief that he might qualify for a loan modification or principal reduction under various programs does not establish the existence of any promises that were clear and unambiguous … Further, Kajeh has not established he can allege reasonable detrimental reliance.

Holmes v. Petrovich Development Co. LLC

191 Cal. App. 4th 1047 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 13, 2011

This is insufficient to establish an adverse employment action by Petrovich. … Under the circumstances, she has failed to meet her burden of establishing error. (Badie v.

ReadyLink Healthcare v. Cotton

24 Cal. Rptr. 3d 720 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 14, 2005

The court concluded that, “even if Courtesy’s customer list would not qualify as a ‘trade secret’ under section 3426.1, the unfair and deceptive practices of employees in stealing Courtesy’s customers should have been enjoined … It clearly states it expires upon final resolution of this case. 4. Disposition The preliminary injunction order is affirmed, subject to the modifications to paragraph “a” specified in this opinion.

People v. Walker

185 Cal. App. 3d 155 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 4, 1986

Before McDonald trial courts relying on the then-established rule (e.g., People v. Guzman (1975) 47 Cal.App.3d 380, 385-386 [ 121 Cal.Rptr. 69 ]; People v. … Rather, it should be accompanied by instructions clearly explaining to the jury the purpose for which it is introduced . . .