Case law

People v. Flint

180 Cal. App. 3d 13 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 21, 1986

The police soon arrived and the witness told them "that a black man wearing a brown leather jacket, blue jeans, brown heavy boots with a medium natural had just left his alleyway about a minute ago." … Brown (1966) 63 Cal.2d 841, 845 [ 48 Cal. Rptr. 609 , 409 P.2d 689 ]; and see, People v. Hannon (1971) 5 Cal.3d 330, 338 [ 96 Cal. Rptr. 35 , 486 P.2d 1235 ]; Pacific Gas & Elec. Co. v. Morse (1970) 6 Cal.

Gunn v. Fontes

148 Cal. App. 2d 351 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 8, 1957

Co. v. … (Garrison v. Edward Brown & Sons, 25 Cal.2d 473, 478 [ 154 P.2d 377 ]; Estate of Kerr, 127 Cal.App.2d 521, 523-524 [ 274 P.2d 234 ].)

Paulus v. Bauder

106 Cal. App. 2d 589 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 20, 1951

Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com., 181 Cal. 460, 465 [ 184 P. 864 ]; and Leupe v. Leupe, 21 Cal.2d 145, 148 [ 130 P.2d 697 ]. … (Olson v. Superior Court, 175 Cal. 250 [ 165 P. 706 , 1 A.L.R. 1589 ]; Brown v. Brown, 170 Cal. 1 [ 147 P. 1168 ]; Civ. Code, § 131; Remley v. Remley, 49 Cal.App. 489 [ 193 P. 604 ].)

Judson Pacific-Murphy Corp. v. Durkee

144 Cal. App. 2d 377 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 11, 1956

Harney, Inc. v. Durkee, 107 Cal.App.2d 570 [ 237 P.2d 561 , 31 A.L.R.2d 457 ] ; see also Stanley-Taylor Co. v. Board of Supervisors, 135 Cal. 486 [67 P. 783]; Laurent v. … We do know, and of this fact the court can take judicial notice (McPheeters v. Board of Medical Examiners, 74 Cal.App.2d 46 [ 168 P.2d 65 ]) that until late in 1951 the American Bridge Company did have a license.

Sharp v. Joint Highway District No. 6

111 Cal. App. 81 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 13, 1931

and that he has had all of the notice that the law requires (Gadd v. … App. 347, 363 [ 231 Pac. 754 ]; Allied Amusement Co. v. Bryan, 201 Cal. 316 [ 256 Pac. 1097 ]). Furthermore, the power to build and pay for-roads is one of the powers which is vested in the local board of supervisors.

People v. Smith

166 Cal. App. 2d 616 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 30, 1958

He testified further that about 12:30 a.m. on November 30 he saw appellant driving a black 1947 Cadillac sedan car and that the left rear windwing of the car was missing; at that time one Williams and one Brown were with … In People v.

Tri-Fanucchi Farms v. Agricultural Labor Rel. Bd.

California Court of Appeal · May 14, 2015

Since the Board is the administrative agency entrusted with enforcement of the ALRA, its interpretation of the ALRA is given deference by the courts and will be followed if not clearly erroneous. (Montebello Rose Co. v. … Norton Co. v. Agricultural Labor Relations Bd. (1979) 26 Cal.3d 1, 29 (J.R. Norton Co.); Bodinson Mfg. Co. v. California E.

Citizen Action to Serve All Students v. Thornley

222 Cal. App. 3d 748 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 30, 1990

(Perley v. Board of Supervisors (1982) 137 Cal.App.3d 424, 435, fn. 6, 436 [ 187 Cal.Rptr. 53 ].) Third, appellants urge an adverse impact on public transportation. … Assuming this is a requirement (but see, Perley v. Board of Supervisors, supra, 137 Cal.App.3d at p. 431 ), this applies only to mitigation of significant environmental effects.

Ventura Foothill Neighbors v. County of Ventura

232 Cal. App. 4th 429 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 15, 2014

(Farrell v. County of Placer (1944) 23 Cal.2d 624, 628; see also Title Ins. Co. v. State Board of Equalization (1992) 4 Cal.4th 715, 730.) … For the relocated building, Board prepared an "Addendum" to the EIR. Board concluded "that no subsequent or supplemental Environmental Impact Report is required."

Steiner v. Darby

88 Cal. App. 2d 481 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 12, 1948

See, also, Danskin v. San Diego Unified School Dist., 28 Cal.2d 536, 548 [ 171 P.2d 885 ]; Congress of Industrial Organ, v. City of Dallas, (Tex.Civ.App.) 198 S.W.2d 143, 146 ; Bell v. … (United Public Workers v.

Holmgren v. County of Los Angeles

71 Cal. Rptr. 3d 611 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 30, 2008

(Heard v. Board of Administration, etc., supra, 39 Cal.App.2d 685; Jenkins v. County of Riverside (2006) 138 Cal.App.4th 593, 610-616 [ 41 Cal.Rptr.3d 686 ]; Smith v. … Kos v. Adamson (1948) 226 Minn. 177, 182-183 [ 32 N.W.2d 281 ]; Conjour v. Whitehall Tp. (E.D.Pa. 1994) 850 F.Supp. 309, 315 ; Civil Service Board of City of Phoenix v.

Marlin v. AIMCO VENEZIA, LLC

64 Cal. Rptr. 3d 488 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 23, 2007

See City of Santa Monica v. … City of Cotati v. Cashman, supra, 29 Cal.4th at page 78. 16 Cf. Gallimore v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Ins. Co. (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 1388, 1399 [ 126 Cal.Rptr.2d 560 ]. 17 Santa Monica Rent Control Bd. v.

In Re Dannenberg

173 Cal. App. 4th 237 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 23, 2009

that of the Board.” … Consequently, there is not some evidence to support the Governor’s decision to reject the Board’s grant of parole, and the appropriate remedy is to vacate the Governor’s decision and reinstate the Board’s decision. V.

People v. Barranday

20 Cal. App. 3d 16 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 16, 1971

In Dutton v. Evans, 400 U.S. 74 [ 27 L.Ed.2d 213 , 91 S.Ct. 210 ], wherein reference was made to California v. … Subsequently, however, in Nelson v.

Cash v. County of Los Angeles

California Court of Appeal · May 30, 2025

Graciano v. … (Chavez v. City of Los Angeles (2010) 47 Cal.4th 970, 985; Serrano v.

Friars Village Homeowners v. Hansing

California Court of Appeal · Oct 9, 2013

(Villa De Las Palmas Homeowners Assn. v. Terifaj (2004) 33 Cal.4th 73, 85; see Lamden v. … v.

Wallace v. Regents of University

75 Cal. App. 274 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 20, 1925

(Abell v. Clark, 84 Cal. 226 [ 24 Pac. 383 ]; French v. Davidson, 143 Cal. 658 [ 77 Pac. 663 ]; State Board of Health v. Board of Trustees, 13 Cal. App. 514 [ 110 Pac. 137 ].) … He was denied the relief prayed for (Williams v. Wheeler, 23 Cal. App. 619 [ 138 Pac. 937 ]).

Rosales v. Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control

171 Cal. App. 2d 624 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 1, 1959

(Martin v. Alcoholic Beverage etc. Appeals Board, 52 Cal.2d 238 [ 340 P.2d 1 ].) … (Swegle v. State Board of Equalization, 125 Cal.App.2d 432 [ 270 P.2d 518 ].)

Baillargeon v. Dep't of Water & Power of L.A.

69 Cal. App. 3d 670 · California Court of Appeal · May 11, 1977

In Strong v. … However, in Crumpler v.

In Re Waters of Soquel Creek Stream System

79 Cal. App. 3d 682 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 11, 1978

CITY OF CAPITOLA, Petitioner and Respondent, v. CHY COMPANY et al., Claimants and Respondents; STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD, Appellant. Docket No. 41457. … In Tulare Dist. v.