Case law

People v. Fowler

32 Cal. App. Supp. 2d 737 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 20, 1938

S.) 328, 330], and State v. Johnson, (1911) 84 Kan. 411 [ 114 Pac. 390 , 41 L. R. A. (N. S.) 539, 541]. In Board of Medical Examiners v. Freenor, (1916) 47 Utah, 430 [ 154 Pac. 941, 942 , Ann. … (Corbett v. State Board of Control, (1922) 188 Cal. 289, 291 [ 204 Pac. 823 ]; In re Alpine, (1928) 203 Cal. 731, 737 [ 265 Pac. 947 , 58 A. L. R. 1500]; Bagg v. Wickizer, (1935) 9 Cal.

Fresno County Department of Social Services v. Irene H.

188 Cal. App. 3d 399 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 26, 1986

Co. v. Workmen’s Comp. App. Bd. (1967) 247 Cal.App.2d 669 [ 55 Cal.Rptr. 810 ]. … (Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962) 57 Cal.2d 450, 455 [ 20 Cal.Rptr. 321 , 369 P.2d 937 ].) II., III * *406 Decision The judgment is affirmed. Brown (G. A.), P. J., and Hamlin, J., concurred.

Swars v. Council of the City of Vallejo

64 Cal. App. 2d 858 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 14, 1944

(Ga rvin v. Chambers, 195 Cal. 212 [ 232 P. 696 ]; Petersen v. Civil Service Board, 67 Cal.App. 70 [ 227 P. 238 ]; Nider v. Homan, 32 Cal.App.2d 11 [ 89 P.2d 136 ] ; Nider v. … (Garvin v. Chambers, supra, at page 221; Walker v. City of San Gabriel, supra, at page 882; Naughton v. Retirement Board of S. F., 43 Cal.App.2d 254, 263 [ 110 P.2d 714 ].)

Lorber v. Storrow

22 Cal. App. 2d 25 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 15, 1937

The cited case has been followed in the eases of Whitten v. California State Board of Optometry, 8 Cal. (2d) 444 [ 65 Pac. (2d) 1296 ] ; Hawley v. Clark, 17 Cal. App. (2d) 546 [ 62 Pac. (2d) 613 ] ; Dysart v. … Co. v. Scarborough, 216 Cal. 698, 706 [ 16 Pac. (2d) 268 ], and Haddad v.

Stanley R. v. Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services

113 Cal. App. 3d 423 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 17, 1980

Brown (1973) 35 Cal.App.3d 317 [ 110 Cal.Rptr. 854 ].) Appellant argues that the complaint doctrine should not apply in civil cases. We do not agree. In People v. … Brown, a criminal case, supra, the court cited language from People v.

Renken v. Compton City School District

207 Cal. App. 2d 106 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 24, 1962

Board of Education, 27 Cal.2d 322, 325 [ 164 P.2d 1 ]; Whitcomb Hotel, Inc. v. California Emp. Com., 24 Cal.2d 753, 757 [ 151 P.2d 233 , 155 A.L.R. 405 ]; County of Los Angeles v. … (See Del Mar Canning Co. v. Payne, 29 Cal.2d 380, 382-383 [ 175 P.2d 231 ]; Fry v. Board of Education, 17 Cal.2d 753, 758 [ 112 P.2d 229 ].)

Martinez v. City of Poway

12 Cal. App. 4th 425 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 12, 1993

(Weil & Brown, Cal. … (Weil & Brown, supra, ¶¶ 8:1717.2, 8:1740.)

Kunert v. MISSION FINANCIAL SERVICES CORP.

1 Cal. Rptr. 3d 589 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 7, 2003

(Boerner v. … Co. v.

Birch v. County of Orange

59 Cal. App. 133 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 20, 1922

Co. v. County of Los Angeles, 162 Cal. 164 [9 A. L. R. 1277, 121 Pac. 384 ].) Attention has been called to the fact that plaintiffs were accorded a hearing before the county board of equalization. … Co. v. State Board of Equalization, 112 Fed. 607 , approved the method as being legitimate and fair.

Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Claude Fisher Co.

161 Cal. App. 2d 431 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 19, 1958

The language of the reviewing court in Stafford v. … (State v. Superior Court, 14 Cal.App. 2d 718 [ 58 P.2d 1322 ].)

Hayes v. Commission on State Mandates

11 Cal. App. 4th 1564 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 30, 1992

(Mills v. Board of Education of District of Columbia, supra, 348 F.Supp. at p. 868 .) … On remand the board clearly applied the now-discredited criteria set forth in this court’s decision in City of Sacramento v.

In Re Jackson

182 Cal. App. 3d 439 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 13, 1986

(Italics added, People v. Fusaro (1971) 18 Cal.App.3d 877, 888 [ 96 Cal.Rptr. 368 ], disapproved on other grounds in People v. … (People v. Fusaro, supra, 18 Cal.App.3d at p. 888 .)

Wilde v. City of Dunsmuir

California Court of Appeal · Nov 15, 2018

(Quintano v. Mercury Casualty Co. (1995) 11 Cal.4th 1049, 1055; Schmidt v. Retirement Board (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 1204, 1210.) … (Totten v. Board of Supervisors (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 826, 838 (Totten).)

Peacock v. County of Sacramento

271 Cal. App. 2d 845 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 16, 1969

In Anderson v. … Co. v. Eshleman (1913) 166 Cal. 640 [ 137 P. 1119 , Ann.Cas. 1915C 822, 50 L.R.A. N.S. 652], and Sneed v.

Agric. Labor Relations Bd. v. Superior Court of San Benito Cty.

29 Cal. App. 4th 688 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 25, 1994

“In the liability phase, the Board issues an order adjudicating whether or not the Act has been violated, but does not determine the extent of the employer’s liability.” (George Arakelian Farms, Inc. v. … (Regal Knitwear Co. v. Board (1945) 324 U.S. 9, 15 [ 89 L.Ed. 661, 667 , 65 S.Ct. 478 ]; Labor Board v. Deena Artware (1960) 361 U.S. 398, 402-404 [ 4 L.Ed.2d 400, 404-405 , 80 S.Ct. 441 ].)

Irwin v. City of Los Angeles

3 Cal. App. 2d 495 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 4, 1935

Under the authority of Donovan v. Board of Police Commissioners, 32 Cal. App. 392 , pages 399 and 400 [ 163 Pac. 69 ], and *498 Kramer v. Board of Police Commissioners, 39 Cal. … We have in mind the language used by the court in Cleu v. Board of Police Commissioners, 3 Cal. App. 174 [ 84 Pac. 672 ], and cited in Donovan v.

McFaddin San Diego 1130, Inc. v. Stroh

208 Cal. App. 3d 1384 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 24, 1989

(See Stearns, supra, 6 Cal.3d at pp. 212-213; Cooper v. Board of Medical Examiners (1975) 49 Cal.App.3d 931, 941-942 [ 123 Cal.Rptr. 563 ]; Code Civ. Proc., § 469.) … (See Tarbox v.

California Aviation Council v. County of Amador

200 Cal. App. 3d 337 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 15, 1988

In Friends of Mammoth v. … (Friends of Mammoth v. Board of Supervisors, supra, 8 Cal.3d at p. 253, fn. 2 .) Subdivision (d) provides that section 21177 does not apply to the Attorney General.

In Re Coordinated Latex Glove Litigation

121 Cal. Rptr. 2d 301 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 15, 2002

(See Morson v. … A Comparison of Definitions of Product Defects: Manufacturing/Design As explained by the Supreme Court in Brown v.

Boliou v. Stockton Unified School District

207 Cal. App. 4th 170 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 25, 2012

(See, e.g., Malloy v. Board of Education (1894) 102 Cal. 642, 647 [ 36 P. 948 ].) The resolution of that issue depends on the answers to two questions. … (Kavanaugh v. West Sonoma County Union High School Dist. (2003) 29 Cal.4th 911, 916 [ 129 Cal.Rptr.2d 811 , 62 P.3d 54 ]; Radian Guaranty, Inc. v.