Case law

California Tahoe Regional Planning Agency v. Day and Night Electric Inc.

163 Cal. App. 3d 898 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 18, 1985

In this case the requisite identity in legal right binds together both the state and city boards; the waiver of the state board, and the estoppel against the state *905 board thus extend to the city board.” … V, § e.)

Fullerton v. International Sound Technicians of Motion Picture

194 Cal. App. 2d 801 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 17, 1961

the board. … . & A.I.W. v. Wisconsin Employment Relations Board, 351 U.S. 266 [ 76 S.Ct. 794 , 100 L.Ed. 1162 ] (footnote 3, pp. 782, 783).

IFS Industries, Inc. v. Stephens

159 Cal. App. 3d 740 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 28, 1984

(Offer v. Superior Court (1924) 194 Cal. 114, 122 [ 228 P. 11 ]; Collins v. O’Laverty (1902) 136 Cal. 31, 35 [ 68 P. 327 ].) … Financial v. Sullivan (1974) 37 Cal.App.3d 5, 11-12 [ 112 Cal.Rptr. 18 ]; People v. Cimarusti (1978) 81 Cal.App.3d 314, 320-321 [ 146 Cal.Rptr. 421 ], and cases there cited; see also DeGrandchamp v.

Curl v. Pacific Home

108 Cal. App. 2d 655 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 15, 1952

In Von Arx v. … Proc. § 416, and Gorman v.

Crown Motors v. City of Redding

232 Cal. App. 3d 173 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 12, 1991

(Sunset Amusement Co. v. Board of Police Commissioners (1972) 7 Cal.3d 64, 72 [ 101 Cal.Rptr. 768 , 496 P.2d 840 ]; Cal. Const., art. XI, § 7.) … (Young v. American Mini Theatres (1976) 427 U.S. 50, 71 [ 49 L.Ed.2d 310, 327 , 96 S.Ct. 2440 ], quoted in City Council v. Taxpayers for Vincent, supra, 466 U.S. *179 at p. 807 [ 80 L.Ed.2d at p. 789 ].)

Miller v. R. K. A. Management Corp.

99 Cal. App. 3d 460 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 5, 1979

(a); Javor v. State Board of Equalization, 12 Cal.3d 790, 796 [ 117 Cal.Rptr. 305 , 527 P.2d 1153 ].) … Brown (Gerald), P.

Craig v. Earl

194 Cal. App. 2d 652 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 10, 1961

Proc., § 437c; Dudum v. City of San Mateo, 167 Cal.App.2d 593, 595 [ 334 P.2d 968 ]; Luders v. … Proc., § 437c; Family Service Agency of Santa Barbara v.

Delta Wetlands Properties v. County of San Joaquin

16 Cal. Rptr. 3d 672 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 29, 2004

In Kehoe v. … (U.S. v. Morrow (1925) 266 U.S. 531 , *141 534-535 [ 69 L.Ed. 425, 427 , 45 S.Ct. 173 , 60 Ct.Cl. 1023 ]; Reuter v. Board of Supervisors of San Mateo County (1934) 220 Cal. 314, 321 [ 30 P.2d 417 ].)

Sacramento Mun. Utility Dist. v. County of Solano

54 Cal. App. 4th 1163 · California Court of Appeal · May 6, 1997

(Brown v. Kelly Broadcasting Co. (1989) 48 Cal.3d 711, 724 [ 257 Cal.Rptr. 708 , 771 P.2d 406 ].) Such intent is normally apparent from the language of the enactment alone. (Lungren v. … (See Babb v.

Baker v. Wadsworth

6 Cal. App. 3d 253 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 1, 1970

(See Ferdig v. State Personnel Board, 71 Cal.2d 96, 104 [ 77 Cal.Rptr. 224 , 453 P.2d 728 ].) … (See Waters v. Civil Service Board, 133 Cal.App.2d 733, 736 [ 284 P.2d 919 ].)

County of Santa Clara v. Super. Ct.

California Court of Appeal · Apr 26, 2022

Quantum meruit is an equitable doctrine under which the “ ‘law implies a promise to pay for services performed under circumstances disclosing that they were not gratuitously rendered.’ ” (Huskinson & Brown v. … III, § 300 [“The county may exercise its powers only through the Board of Supervisors or officers acting under its authority or of law or of this 2 Charter.”] ; see Dones v.

People v. Castellanos

175 Cal. App. 4th 1524 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 29, 2009

Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Assistant Attorney General, and Sarah J. Farhat, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. … (See People v. Taylor (2004) 118 Cal.App.4th 454, 456 [ 12 Cal.Rptr.3d 923 ]; People v.

Pridham v. Lewis

30 Cal. App. 395 · California Court of Appeal · May 6, 1916

The case of Los Angeles County v. Hammel, 26 Cal. … (Storke v. Goux, 129 Cal. 526 , [ 62 Pac. 68 ] ; Larew v. Newman, 81 Cal. 588 , [ 23 Pac. 227 ].) The judgment is affirmed. Conrey, P. J., and James, J., concurred.

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

260 Cal. App. 2d 663 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 29, 1968

Co. v. Heilbron (1909) 156 Cal. 408, 409 [ 104 P. 979 ].) … Co. v. Pearson (1868) 35 Cal. 247, 262-263 ; Sacramento etc. Drainage Dist. ex rel. State Reclamation Board v. Reed (1963) 215 Cal.App.2d 60, 64 [ 29 Cal.Rptr. 847 ]; Arnerick v.

Hiller v. City of Los Angeles

197 Cal. App. 2d 685 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 6, 1961

In one of them, City of Cleveland v. … The other case, McGuire v.

Van Wagener v. MacFarland

58 Cal. App. 115 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 16, 1922

(Board of Education v. Board of Trustees, 129 Cal. 599 [ 62 Pac. 173 ].) … Board of Supervisors, 41 Mich. 647 [ 2 N. W. 904 ]; People ex rel. Quisenberry v. Ellis, 253 Ill. 369 [Ann. Cas. 1913A, 589, 97 N. E. 697 ]; Blackwell v. Newkirk, 31 Okl. 304 [Ann.

In Re Dennis

46 Cal. App. 3d 50 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 28, 1975

Brown. … (People v. Brown, 29 Cal.2d 555 ; People v. Knowles, 35 *59 Cal.2d 175; In re Ward, 64 Cal.2d 672 ; People v. Gomez, 252 Cal.App.2d 844 ; People v. Paxton, 255 Cal.App.2d 62 .)”

Hazon-Iny Development, Inc. v. City of Santa Monica

128 Cal. App. 3d 1 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 19, 1982

Board of Supervisors (1978) 22 Cal.3d 644 [ 150 Cal.Rptr. 242 , 586 P.2d 556 ], and El Patio v. … (Brougher v. Board of Public Works (1928) 205 Cal. 426, 435 [ 271 P. 487 ]; see Russian Hill Improvement Assn. v. Board of Permit Appeals (1967) 66 Cal.2d 34, 39 [ 56 Cal.Rptr. 672 , 423 P.2d 824 ]; cf. Miller v.

City of Ukiah v. County of Mendocino

196 Cal. App. 3d 47 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 10, 1987

(No Oil, Inc. v. … Paramount Rock Co. v.

Lanquist v. Ventura County Employees' Retirement Ass'n

235 Cal. App. 4th 186 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 16, 2015

(Prentice v. Board of Administration (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 983, 989.) … (Knight v. Board of Administration (1948) 32 Cal.2d 400, 402.)