Case law

Reagan v. Bahrs

11 Cal. App. 234 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 31, 1909

The principles laid down in Burr v. Board of Supervisors, 96 Cal. 210 , [ 31 Pac. 38 ], control this case. … A court will not exercise a power for no material or useful purpose (Huntington v. Nicoll, 3 Johns. 598 ), and will refuse a writ of mandamus if it appears that it can have no beneficial effect (People v.

Stardust Mobile Estates, LLC v. City of San Buenaventura

55 Cal. Rptr. 3d 218 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 22, 2007

The burden is on the appellant to prove the board’s decision is neither reasonable nor lawful.’ (Carson Harbor Village, Ltd. v. … In Herzberg v.

Oquendo v. California Institution for Women

212 Cal. App. 3d 520 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 24, 1989

Appellant argues that in State Personnel Bd. v. … (Takahashi v. Board of Education (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 1464, 1478 [ 249 Cal.Rptr. 578 ].) In our opinion, this principle applies to cases brought under the Fair Employment Housing Act, as well.

Wheeler v. City of Santa Ana

81 Cal. App. 2d 811 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 15, 1947

(Livingstone v. MacGillivray, 1 Cal.2d 546 [ 36 P.2d 622 ]; Bruce v. Civil Service Board, 6 Cal.App.2d 633 [ 45 P.2d 419 ]; Haub v. Tuttle, 80 Cal.App. 561 [ 251 P. 925 ].) It was said in Frisbee v. … In Frisbee v.

Moniz v. Moniz

142 Cal. App. 2d 527 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 26, 1956

In Brown v. … Pate, 120 Cal.App.2d 699 [ 261 P.2d 788 ], certiorari denied, 347 U.S. 968 [ 74 S.Ct. 776 , 98 L.Ed. 1110 ]; Brown v. Brown, supra.)

South Bay Creditors Trust v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.

82 Cal. Rptr. 2d 1 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 5, 1999

(Re-Open Rambla, Inc. v. Board of Supervisors (1995) 39 Cal.App.4th 1499, 1511 [ 46 Cal.Rptr.2d 822 ].) … (Kemp v.

Shields v. Singleton

15 Cal. App. 4th 1611 · California Court of Appeal · May 20, 1993

(Gaillard v. Natomas Co. (1985) 173 Cal.App.3d 410, 415 [ 219 Cal.Rptr. 74 ].) II Plaintiff next maintains that demand on the board was not required because any demand would have been futile. … The Court of Appeal in Findley v.

Jackson v. Otis

66 Cal. App. 357 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 27, 1924

(United States v. Teller, 107 U. S. 64 [ 27 L. Ed. 352 , 2 Sup. Ct. Rep. 39, see, also, Rose’s U. S. Notes]; Mahon v. Board of Education, 171 N. Y. 263 [ 89 Am. St. Rep. 810 , 63 N. E. 1107 ]; State v. … (Mammitt v. Gaynor, 144 N. Y. Supp. 123 ; State v. Love, supra; People v. Abbott, 274 Ill. 380 [ 113 N. E. 696 ].) . . .

California Trout, Inc. v. Superior Court

218 Cal. App. 3d 187 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 23, 1990

In California Trout, Inc. v. … (See Newland v.

Munoz v. State of California

33 Cal. App. 4th 1767 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 21, 1995

(Santee v. Santa Clara County Office of Education (1990) 220 Cal.App.3d 702, 710 [ 269 Cal.Rptr. 605 ].) 2 On appeal, respondent requests this court to take judicial notice of plaintiff’s Board of Control file. … (See Shaeffer v.

Chenoweth v. Office of City Clerk

131 Cal. App. 2d 498 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 15, 1955

And evidence contrary to that supporting the conclusions of the board should be disregarded. (La Prade v. Department of Water & Power, 27 Cal.2d 47 [162 P.2d 13]; Pratt v. … Los Angeles County Civil Service Com., 108 Cal.App.2d 114 [ 238 P.2d 3 ]; Nunes v. Board of Civil Service Comrs., 88 Cal.App.2d 632 [ 199 P.2d 311 ].)

Lucas Valley Homeowners Assn. v. County of Marin

233 Cal. App. 3d 130 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 12, 1991

(Matthews v. Board of Supervisors (1962) 203 Cal.App.2d 800 [ 21 Cal.Rptr. 914 ].) … (Siller v. Board of Supervisors (1962) 58 Cal.2d 479, 485 [ 25 Cal.Rptr. 73 , 375 P.2d 41 ].)

McCarthy v. Fletcher

207 Cal. App. 3d 130 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 13, 1989

(Board of Education v. Pico, supra, 457 U.S. at p. 870 [ 73 L.Ed.2d at p. 449 ].) … (Board of Education v. Barnette, supra, 319 U.S. 624, 642 [ 87 L.Ed. 1628, 1639 ].)

In re Shelton

California Court of Appeal · Aug 24, 2020

In a prison system in which the treatment of mentally ill inmates has been declared unconstitutional by the United States Supreme Court (Brown v. Plata (2011) 563 U.S. 493, affirming Coleman v. Wilson (E.D. … (Cucamongans United for Reasonable Expansion v. City of Rancho Cucamonga (2000) 82 Cal.App.4th 473, 479–480; Dobbins v. San Diego County Civil Service Com. (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 125, 128, fn. 3.)”

Dittus v. Cranston

186 Cal. App. 2d 837 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 28, 1960

(Stevenson v. Colgan, supra.) … Although, as said in Stevenson v.

Boydston v. Napa Sanitation District

222 Cal. App. 3d 1362 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 17, 1990

Appellant’s board of directors reaffirmed the award. … (East Bay Garbage Co. v. Washington Township Sanitation Co., supra, 52 Cal.2d at p. 713 .) “Highest responsible bids” secure the largest reasonable return to the public. (Ibid; Brown v.

New Plumbing Contractors v. Edwards, Sooy & Byron

121 Cal. Rptr. 2d 472 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 25, 2002

(Western Polymer Technology, Inc. v. Reliance Ins. Co. (1995) 32 Cal.App.4th 14, 24 [ 38 Cal.Rptr.2d 78 ].) … Co. v. Ridout Roofing Co. (1998) 68 Cal.App.4th 495, 504-505 [ 80 Cal.Rptr.2d 286 ].)

Los Angeles Council of School Nurses v. Los Angeles Unified School District

113 Cal. App. 3d 666 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 19, 1980

. 4 In Amador Valley Secondary Educators Assn. v. … Similarly, in applying the principles as illustrated in San Diego Teachers Assn. v. Superior Court and Amador Valley Secondary Educators Assn. v.

People v. Stanley

California Court of Appeal · Dec 12, 2017

Tanaka responded to the bus, which was parked, boarded the bus, and spoke with the driver. … (People v. Brown (2015) 61 Cal.4th 968, 975.) Because the relevant facts are undisputed in this case, we exercise de novo review.

In Re KF

173 Cal. App. 4th 655 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 29, 2009

Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Assistant Attorney General, Martin S. … (See People v. Birkett (1999) 21 Cal.4th 226, 246 [ 87 Cal.Rptr.2d 205 , 980 P.2d 912 ]; People v.