Case law

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.

Christensen v. Lightbourne

California Court of Appeal · Oct 6, 2017

Counting the garnished amounts as nonexempt income to the applicant’s family, San Mateo County determined the family’s income was too high to qualify for CalWORKs cash aid and denied the application. … Remaining Arguments Christensen’s remaining arguments do not establish that the Department’s policy is clearly erroneous or unauthorized. 1.

People v. Portillo

California Court of Appeal · May 15, 2023

Some of these purposes clearly implicate hearsay. … Coleman (1963) 222 Cal.App.2d 358, 361 [owner of stolen tools was qualified to testify to value of property for purposes of proving grand theft].)

Williams v. Sonic Automotive CA1/3

California Court of Appeal · Apr 29, 2022

The arbitrator shall have the immunity of a judicial officer from civil liability when acting in the capacity of an arbitrator, which immunity supplements any other existing immunity. … “The general principles of unconscionability are well established.

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.

People v. Chambers

22 Cal. App. 2d 687 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 28, 1937

That conduct was clearly in contravention of the provisions of the California Criminal Syndicalism Act. … These documents clearly contain numerous seditious and incendiary utterances which are revolutionary in character.

The People v. Conley

California Court of Appeal · May 2, 2013

Nothing more is needed to establish that element of driving under the influence. … The rule in Estrada does not apply “where the Legislature clearly signals its intent to make the amendment prospective, by the inclusion of either an express saving clause or its equivalent.” (People v.

Bracewell v. State Dept. of Public Health CA3

California Court of Appeal · Feb 6, 2024

. § 1771 et seq.), which established the WIC program. (42 U.S.C. § 1786.) … The document purportedly shows that the audit was not properly performed and the Bracewells did not qualify for a three-year disqualification.

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.

Pizarro v. Reynoso

10 Cal. App. 5th 172 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 28, 2017

Failure to provide proper headings forfeits issues that may be discussed in the brief but are not clearly identified by a heading. … The uncontested facts, both as stipulated and found, establish that [Pizarro] did not commence and conduct litigation (i) that was unfounded and frivolous, or (ii) in bad faith. “4.

North Coast Rivers Alliance v. Westlands Water District

227 Cal. App. 4th 832 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 3, 2014

“In interpreting CEQA, we accord the Guidelines great weight except where they are clearly unauthorized or erroneous.” … a long-term right as established in the 1963 water service contract.

Luckey v. Plaza Bank CA4/3

California Court of Appeal · Feb 17, 2015

Luckey argues the court erred in granting summary judgment because (1) only a bankruptcy court can relieve the Bank of its obligations established by contract; (2) the payments owed to him under the employment agreement do … And the answer to that question is clearly yes.

Desherow v. Rhodes

1 Cal. App. 3d 733 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 14, 1969

Clearly, under the language of section 69844 the clerk’s failure to enter an order within the time specified by the court does not invalidate the effectiveness of its entry; such a failure is a purely clerical error which … of the doctrine have not been established.

People v. Mehserle

206 Cal. App. 4th 1125 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 8, 2012

[and] qualifies as a ‘wanton and abandoned disregard of human life.’ ” (Fagotto v. … First, we note the well-established law.

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

Zepeda v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal · Nov 13, 2023

After doing so, the Legislature properly delegated authority to the Judicial Council “to adopt rules establishing criteria for imposing the upper or lower terms in order to promote uniformity,” and established a “standard … Either way, the finder of fact is considering factors established by the Judicial Council.

In re I.B.

California Court of Appeal · Aug 7, 2020

“[T]he trial court’s ruling should not be disturbed on appeal unless an abuse of discretion is clearly established. [Citations.] … We will not disturb the juvenile court’s ruling unless the parties clearly establish the court abused its discretion.

People v. Cimolino CA5

California Court of Appeal · Dec 6, 2022

Deputy Lee’s Prior Statement Does Not Qualify as an “Inconsistent Statement” Defendant contends she was entitled to impeach Deputy Lee’s prior statement in the CAD log because it qualified as an “inconsistent … At the outset, defendant is correct Deputy Lee’s testimony was relevant to establish defendant had the requisite felonious intent prior to attempting to break into Angela’s house.

Carlisle v. Fawcett Publications, Inc.

201 Cal. App. 2d 733 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 23, 1962

“A publication may clearly be defamatory as to somebody, and yet on its face make no reference to the individual plaintiff. … If it be objected that the mere relationship with some public figure should not subject a person to a qualified loss of his privacy, the identical observation could be made logically as to the man held up on the street, the

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.