Case law

Marculescu v. City Planning Commission

7 Cal. App. 2d 371 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 4, 1935

The board of supervisors in establishing a procedure could not deprive a property owner of a right given by the charter. (Rodgers v. Board of Public Works, 208 Cal. 291 [ 281 Pac. 64 ]; Gallagher v. Foerst, 128 Cal. … (Harpham v. Board of Supervisors, 41 Cal. App. 192 [ 182 Pac. 324 ]; Symons v. San Francisco, 115 Cal. 555 [ 42 Pac. 913 , 47 Pac. 453 ]; Damrell v. Board of Supervisors of San Joaquin Co., 40 Cal. 154 ; Hildebrand v.

State Department of Public Health v. County of Imperial

67 Cal. App. 2d 244 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 11, 1944

In Smith v. … In Barclay v. Blackinton, 127 Cal. 189 [ 59 P. 834 ], cited in Smith v.

Hernandez v. Murphy

46 Cal. App. 2d 201 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 23, 1941

As was said in Crawford v. … Jackie attempted to board the bus while it was in motion.

Wright v. Munro

144 Cal. App. 2d 843 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 8, 1956

(Phillips v. Municipal Court, 24 Cal.App.2d 453, 455 [ 75 P.2d 548 ].) … (Marlo v. State Board of Medical Examiners, 112 Cal.App.2d 276 [ 246 P.2d 69 ]; Mast v. State Board of Optometry, 139 Cal.App.2d 78 [ 293 P.2d 148 ] ; Taylor v.

Wine v. Boyar

220 Cal. App. 2d 375 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 18, 1963

The decision of the board of supervisors to expend public funds on these highways was a legislative act. (O. T. Johnson Corp. v. City of Los Angeles, 198 Cal. 308, 324 [245 P. 164]; Sherman v. … In City of Oakland v.

Holland v. Universal Underwriters Insurance

270 Cal. App. 2d 417 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 5, 1969

Co. v. Brown, 63 Cal.2d 508 [ 47 Cal.Rptr. 363 , 407 P.2d 275 ]; Hen *422 dricks v. Meritplan Ins. Co., 205 Cal.App.2d 133, 136 [ 22 Cal.Rptr. 682 ].) Frankly, we are not impressed. … Co. v. Brown, 63 Cal.2d 508, 511, fn. 2 [ 47 Cal.Rptr. 363 , 407 P.2d 275 ].)

Heinlein v. Anaheim Union High School District

96 Cal. App. 2d 19 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 8, 1950

Board of Trustees, 18 Cal.2d 586 [ 116 P.2d 593 ] ; Fry v. Board of Education, 17 Cal.2d 753 [ 112 P.2d 229 ]; Abraham v. Sims, 2 Cal.2d 698 [ 42 P.2d 1029 ] and Fidler v. … (Fidler v. Board of Trustees, supra; Abraham v. Sims, supra; Butterworth v. Boyd, 12 Cal.2d 140, 152 [ 82 P.2d 434 , 126 A.L.R. 838 ] ; Kacsur v. Board of Trustees, supra, p. 591.)

O'Neil v. Brode

40 Cal. App. 371 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 21, 1919

(Williams v. McDonald, 58 Cal. 527 ; Pennington v. Baehr, 48 Cal. 565 ; Jansen v. McCahill, 22 Cal. 563 , [ 83 Am. Dec. 84 ].) [3] 3. … (Hayes v. Handley et al., 28 Cal. App. Dec. 592. [Decided by supreme court February 18, 1920, 187 Pac. 952 ).] [5] 4.

Bedard v. City of Los Angeles

California Court of Appeal · Oct 31, 2024

(Rand v. Board of Psychology (2012) 206 Cal.App.4th 565, 575 (Rand).) … In Barber v.

Thurston v. County of Los Angeles

117 Cal. App. 2d 618 · California Court of Appeal · May 5, 1953

(Holt v. Board of Police Etc. Comrs., 86 Cal.App.2d 714, 716 [196 P.2d 94]; Larson v. Board of Police & Fire Comrs., 71 Cal.App.2d 60, 63 [ 162 P.2d 33 ].) … (England v. City of Long Beach, 27 Cal.2d 343, 346-347 [ 163 P.2d 865 ]; Knight v. Board Etc.

People v. Manriquez

18 Cal. App. 4th 1167 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 18, 1993

(People v. Cotton (1991) 230 Cal.App.3d 1072, 1079 [ 284 Cal.Rptr. 757 ]; see also People v. … (Brown, at p. 686; People v. Everett (1986) 186 Cal.App.3d 274, 280-281 [ 230 Cal.Rptr. 604 ].)

Gibson v. Twaddle

1 Cal. App. 126 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 3, 1905

(People v. Stewart, 132 Cal. 285 , [ 64 Pac. 285 ].) … (Pacheco v. Beck, 52 Cal. 7 ; Carlson v. Burt, 111 Cal. 131 , [ 43 Pac. 583 ].)

Sierra Club v. Contra Costa County

10 Cal. App. 4th 1212 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 4, 1992

(Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 564 [ 276 Cal.Rptr. 410 , 801 P.2d 1161 ].) … (Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors, supra, 52 Cal.3d at p. 562 [hereafter Goleta II].)

Schulz v. Superior Court of Yolo County

66 Cal. App. 3d 440 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 26, 1977

Chester, Chairman of the Medical Advisory Board. “3. … In a case decided by this court in 1974, Matchett v.

County of Los Angeles v. Superior Court

80 Cal. Rptr. 2d 860 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 29, 1998

(Brandt v. Board of Supervisors, supra, 84 Cal.App.3d at p. 602 [sheriff]; Pitts, supra, 17 Cal.4th at p. 361 [district attorney]; Gov. Code, § 25303 [sheriffs and district attorneys].) … Code, § 25303; Brandt v. Board of Supervisors, supra, 84 Cal.App.3d at p. 602 .) 1 Cases cited by plaintiff which were decided before McMillian have limited precedential value. (See Pembaur v.

Palmanteer v. Foremost Life Ins. Co.

82 Cal. App. 3d 341 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 29, 1978

(See Klepper v. Standard Life Ins. Co. (1976) 60 Cal.App.3d 470 [ 131 Cal.Rptr. 519 ].) … ; and, the second being the actual financing itself from the Bank of Alex Brown . . . .”

In re Twinn

190 Cal. App. 4th 447 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 23, 2010

On each occasion the Governor, exercising his authority under article V, section 8, subdivision (b), of the California Constitution and Penal Code section 3041.2, reversed the Board’s decision. … The Governor’s decision to affirm, modify, or reverse the decision of the Board rests on the same factors that guide the Board’s decision (Cal Const., art. V, § 8, subd.

State of Cal. Ex Rel. State Pub. Wks. Bd. v. Wherity

275 Cal. App. 2d 241 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 28, 1969

In People v. … People v. Ocean Shore R.R., Inc., 32 Cal.2d 406, 426 [ 196 P.2d 570 , 6 A.L.R.2d 1179 ].) Mr. Wilson was competent to testify on the subject. (People v. Al. G. Smith Co., Ltd., 86 Cal.App.2d 308, 312 [ 194 P.2d 750 ].)

Ziani Homeowners Ass'n v. Brookfield Ziani LLC

243 Cal. App. 4th 274 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 22, 2015

The HOA board and Mr. … At the April 22 HOA board meeting, Mr.

San Francisco Unified School District v. City & County of San Francisco

54 Cal. App. 2d 105 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 20, 1942

(Boyd v. Huntington, 215 Cal. 473, 482 [ 11 P. (2d) 383 ] ; Penziner v. West Am. Fin. Co., 10 Cal. (2d) 160, 176 [ 74 P. (2d) 252 ]; Fay v. … (Capital Bond & Investment Co. v. Hood, 218 Cal. 729 *112 [ 24 P. (2d) 765 ]) and equally subject to the rule as quoted in Thompson v. Cook, supra, from Hill v. City Cab etc.