Case law

Moreland v. Department of Corporations

194 Cal. App. 3d 506 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 26, 1987

The foregoing discussion demonstrates clearly that there are fundamental differences between Goldfield and the case we have before us. … otherwise indicated. 2 Section 25532 provides: “(a) If, in the opinion of the commissioner, the sale of any security is subject to qualification under this law and it is being or has been offered or sold without first being qualified

Ward v. The Bank of New York Mellon CA2/5

California Court of Appeal · Jan 26, 2016

Don hoped that the Wards would qualify for a modified loan which would incorporate the amount of the arrears, but Wells Fargo clearly stated collection efforts would continue during the modification review process. … Don testified defendants never promised that the Wards would qualify for a loan modification and Wells Fargo clearly stated that collection efforts would proceed during the modification review process.

In re D.P.

California Court of Appeal · Jun 30, 2023

But even if we were to consider it, the siblings’ adoptive parents do not qualify as relatives for consideration under section 361.3. … The juvenile court’s determination that the proposed change in placement was not in D.P.’s best interest “should not be disturbed on appeal unless an abuse of discretion is clearly established.” (Id. at p. 318.)

People v. Frank CA4/2

California Court of Appeal · Dec 4, 2014

In support, defendant contends that his 2003 conviction under section 245, subdivision (a)(1) does not qualify as a strike. … Hence, his “incriminating statements were obtained in violation of Miranda and their admission at [defendant’s] trial violated his clearly established rights under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.”

Toigo v. Town of Ross

82 Cal. Rptr. 2d 649 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 30, 1998

In order to establish entitlement to summary adjudication, the moving party must establish that the cause of action is without merit by negating an essential element or by establishing a complete defense. (§ 437c, subd. … In arguing that a final decision has been made for ripeness purposes, the claimant has the heavy burden of setting forth facts that are “clear, complete, and unambiguous” showing that the agency has “drawn the line, clearly

People v. Young

California Court of Appeal · Nov 17, 2017

This observation flows by implication from Mendes, supra, 23 Cal.3d 847, in which our Supreme Court held that “[u]nless the facts clearly establish a sufficient basis on which to reach an informed and intelligent decision … Conversely, if the facts do clearly establish a sufficient basis for removing a juror, that removal may happen outside the presence of both the defendant and defense counsel.

Ryan v. Riley

65 Cal. App. 181 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 7, 1924

W. 671 ], expressed clearly the idea we have in mind: “It is easy to give general definitions of the three great governmental powers. … a statute, cannot so deal with particulars as to meet or provide for every case or contingency which may arise and of which legislative cognizance is allowable if necessary to the complete enjoyment of those privileges, immunities

Ramona Unified School District v. Tsiknas

37 Cal. Rptr. 3d 381 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 9, 2005

On the abuse of process claim, RUSD argued there was evidence showing defendants, by pursuing the second amended petition and the motion for private attorney general fees, had *518 asserted claims so clearly unmeritorious … Although RUSD suggests each amendment to the writ petition qualified as a separate lawsuit or proceeding, thereby satisfying the quantitative threshold for a barratry claim, the plain language of the statute requires multiple

Foster v. Ronco CA3

California Court of Appeal · Oct 27, 2021

The trial court began by characterizing the writ petition as a “confusing hodge-podge,” addressing provisions of the Elections Code “which are clearly inapplicable to the relief” sought. … Such generalized claims, unsupported by meaningful analysis and citation to authority, are inadequate to carry an appellant’s burden to establish error. (Allen v.

Goodman v. Jonas

142 Cal. App. 2d 775 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 3, 1956

It was established that the leased factory was zoned M-l for manufacture. … per cent of the premises and the incinerator did not comply with the requirements of the law, that the premises were not fit for the manufacture of furniture and that the incinerator could not be used because it could not qualify

Garcetti v. Superior Court

102 Cal. Rptr. 2d 214 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 21, 2001

In that report he noted that the 1994 and 1988 offenses qualified as prior sexually violent offenses because of the age of the victims. … He noted that Marentez "may brush over some requirements but, when he understands a situation clearly, he respects the rights of others and is humanistically inclined."

Marriage of Hinman CA6

California Court of Appeal · Dec 29, 2023

She asks this court to add qualifying language to the agreement. To do so would substantially alter the agreement reached by the parties as clearly and explicitly stated in the judgment. This we cannot do.” … Section 5.11.4, however, is qualified: “Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement. . . .” (Italics added.)

Roberts v. Gulf Oil Corp.

147 Cal. App. 3d 770 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 4, 1983

Gulf argues that each of these examples is clearly factual, not subjective information. … Some information may remain as designated public records but only when the availability of such information is clearly in the public interest.

Wesson v. Staples the Office Superstore, LLC

California Court of Appeal · Sep 9, 2021

In such cases the work is clearly not exempt in nature. … Thus, Arias stands for the proposition that PAGA claims need not qualify as class actions.

In Re Marriage of Haines

33 Cal. App. 4th 277 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 21, 1995

The conveyance was necessary to qualify for a refinance loan, the proceeds of which were used to pay off the settlement of the lawsuit by Elsa’s mother. … Clearly, under the facts of this case, the common law presumption of title and the community property presumption of undue influence are in conflict. Our task is to resolve that conflict.

McPherson v. Public Employment Relations Board

189 Cal. App. 3d 293 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 11, 1987

Director of Employee Relations is now the negotiator for the District, and the personnel secretary’s assigned responsibilities include ‘access to and knowledge of the District’s employer/employee relations,’ the position qualifies … Clearly, this was an implied threat to remove her from her position if she was on the committee and directly interfered with her right to engage in labor relations activity.

In Re Farley

1 Cal. Rptr. 3d 108 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 23, 2003

, 105 S.Ct. 2768 ]), and we must afford great deference to an administrative agency’s expertise (In re Carter (1988) 199 Cal.App.3d 271, 276 [ 244 Cal.Rptr. 648 ]) ‘where the agency’s interpretation of the regulation is clearly … where certain charges are dismissed, CDC would be unable to classify defendants as sex offenders even though reliable information from arrest reports and district attorneys shows that the defendant did, in fact, commit a qualifying

People v. Hewitt CA2/6

California Court of Appeal · Oct 20, 2014

Thus, there is no constitutional requirement that the facts be established beyond a reasonable doubt. [¶] . . . … Appellant's criminal record and prison discipline record clearly support the finding that appellant poses a substantial risk to public safety if released.

Spinks v. Equity Residential Briarwood Apartments

171 Cal. App. 4th 1004 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 4, 2009

Beyond that, she argued: “The lease clearly establishes tenancy status for Plaintiff as a third-party beneficiary.” … Clearly she would need to be informed of what these rules were.”

Symonds v. Mercury Savings and Loan Ass'n

225 Cal. App. 3d 1458 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 4, 1990

If bad faith is established the customer’s recovery ‘includes other damages, if any, suffered by the party as a proximate consequence’ (Section 4-103(5); see also Section 4-402).” (Cal. U. Com. Code, § 4212, com. 5.) … Appellant has clearly alleged Mercury was negligent in its handling of the Nyeholt check and that, had the check been handled properly, there would have been sufficient funds on which final settlement would have been made