Case law

Reynolds v. City of San Carlos

126 Cal. App. 3d 208 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 28, 1981

Harmon v. Board of Retirement (1976) 62 Cal.App.3d 689, 697 [ 133 Cal.Rptr. 154 ].) … (Summerford v. Board of Retirement (1977) 72 Cal.App.3d 128, 130 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 814 ].) C.

People Ex Rel. Beede v. Town of Antioch

17 Cal. App. 751 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 29, 1911

Ency. of Law, 633, 634 ; 36 Cyc. 1139; Belknap v. City of Louisville, 93 Ky. 444 , [ 20 S. W. 309 ]; Clark’s Run etc. Co. v. Commonwealth, 96 Ky. 525 , [ 29 S. W. 360 ] ; People v. Farnham, 35 Ill. 562 ; Hamilton v. … Co. v. Weis, 118 Cal. 489 , [ 50 Pac. 697 ]; Palms v. Shawano County, 61 Wis. 211 , [ 21 N. W. 77 ].)

Walters v. Pine Cove County Water District

177 Cal. App. 2d 498 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 27, 1960

Co. v. Kings County Water District, 47 Cal.2d 140 [ 302 P.2d 1 ], that the board erred and abused its discretion in refusing to exclude the property. … The trial court held, however, pursuant to the rules laid down in Fascination, Inc. *500 v. Hoover, 39 Cal.2d 260 [ 246 P.2d 656 ], that the matter should be remanded to the board for further hearing.

People v. Barrow

233 Cal. App. 3d 721 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 23, 1991

(Brosnahan v. Brown (1982) 32 Cal.3d 236, 254-255 [ 186 Cal.Rptr. 30 , 651 P.2d 274 ].) *461 Appellant relies on the recent case of Taxpayers to Limit Campaign Spending v. Fair Pol. … (Brosnahan v. Brown, supra, 32 Cal.3d at p. 255 ; In re Nordin (1983) 143 Cal.App.3d 538, 540-541 [ 192 Cal.Rptr. 38 ]; 4 Witkin & Epstein, Cal.

Rancho Santa Fe Ass'n v. Dolan-King

8 Cal. Rptr. 3d 614 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 7, 2004

In Lamden v. La Jolla Shores Clubdominium Homeowners Assn. (1999) 21 Cal.4th 249, 264 [ 87 Cal.Rptr.2d 237 , 980 P.2d 940 ] (Lamden), the Supreme Court discussed its prior opinion, Nahrstedt v. … (Toigo v. Town of Ross (1999) 70 Cal.App.4th 309, 317 [ 82 Cal.Rptr.2d 649 ].)

Dailey v. City of San Diego CA4/1

223 Cal. App. 4th 237 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 26, 2013

(See Woodland Park Management, LLC v. City of East Palo Alto Rent Stabilization Board (2010) 181 18 Cal.App.4th 915, 923, fn. 5.) … (Voters for Responsible Retirement v. Board of Supervisors (1994) 8 Cal.4th 765, 781.)

Rathjen Bros. v. Collins

50 Cal. App. 2d 774 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 27, 1942

These conclusions find complete support in State Board of Equalization v. Superior Court, 5 Cal. App. (2d) 374 [ 42 Pac. (2d) 1076 ].” … (People v. Seymour, 16 Cal. 332 [ 76 Am. Dec. 521 ] ; Moore v. Patch, 12 Cal. 265 ; see, also, Roth Drug, Inc. v. Johnson, 13 Cal. App. (2d) 720 [ 57 Pac. (2d) 1022 ].)

Pece v. Tama Trading Co.

22 Cal. App. 2d 219 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 30, 1937

Co. v. … (Thatch v. Livingston, 13 Cal. App. (2d) 202 [56 Pac. (2d) *223 549] ; People v. Groves, 9 Cal. App. (2d) 317, 321 [ 49 Pac. (2d) 888 , 50 Pac. (2d) 813 ] ; Leavens v.

Bronco Wine Co. v. Frank A. Logoluso Farms

214 Cal. App. 3d 699 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 5, 1989

After Sims , the Supreme Court held that the decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board could be given collateral estoppel effect. (Traub v. … Board of Retirement (1983) 34 Cal.3d 793, 798 [ 195 Cal.Rptr. 681 , 670 P.2d 335 ].) Administrative collateral estoppel has been applied to the administrative adjudications of the State Board of Control.

People v. Espinoza

California Court of Appeal · Jun 16, 2014

(Stats 2011, ch. 15, § 1; see People v. Cruz (2012) 207 Cal.App.4th 664, 668; People v. Reece (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 204, 207.) … Brown (2012) 54 Cal.4th 314, 328-330 [no equal protection violation in prospective application for former section 4019, granting increased custody credits].)

Estate of Moore

65 Cal. App. 29 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 21, 1923

Brown, and examined him as to his knowledge of Mrs. Moore’s affairs. They showed that Mr. Brown was a favorite nephew of Mrs. … (Stedman v. Stedman, 179 Cal. 288, 291 [ 176 Pac. 437 ].)

California State Employees' Ass'n v. Regents of University of California

267 Cal. App. 2d 667 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 26, 1968

(Select Base Materials v. Board of Equal. (1959) 51 Cal.2d 640 [ 335 P.2d 672 ] ; J. T. Jenkins Co. v. County of Los Angeles (1960) 178 Cal.App.2d 379 [ 2 Cal.Rptr. 852 ].) … Code, § 12470; *671 Newmarker v.

Moreland Teachers Assn. v. Kurze

109 Cal. App. 3d 648 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 25, 1980

(Lewin v. Board of Trustees (1976) 62 Cal.App. *654 3d 977, 982 [ 133 Cal.Rptr. 385 ].) Otherwise, more persons would be laid off than necessitated by the decline in ADA. (Burgess v. … (See Burgess v. Board of Education, supra, 41 Cal.App.3d 571, 578-579 .)

Pacific Finance Corp. v. City of Lynwood

114 Cal. App. 509 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 1, 1931

(People v. Stratton, (1865) 28 Cal. 382 ; Patton v. Board of Health, (1899) 127 Cal. 388 [ 78 Am. St. Rep. 66 , 59 Pac. 702 ]; Wall v. Board of Directors, (1904) 145 Cal. 468 [ 78 Pac. 951 ].) … (People v. Harrington, (1883) 63 Cal. 257 ; Patton v. Board of Health, supra; Wall v. Board of Directors, supra.)

Lewis v. Super. Ct.

California Court of Appeal · May 29, 2014

(Board of Medical Quality Assurance v. Gherardini, supra, at p. 679.) … Board of Medical Quality Assurance v.

Fountain v. City of Sacramento

1 Cal. App. 461 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 23, 1905

(Fratt v. Clark, 12 Cal. 89 ; Roberts v. Evans, 43 Cal. 380 ; De La Guerra v. Newhall, 55 Cal. 20 ; Lehmann v. Schmidt, 87 Cal 15, [ 25 Pac. 161 ] ; Chitenden v. Pratt, 89 Cal. 173 , [ 26 Pac. 626 ] ; Lataillade v. … In Roberts v.

East Side Union High School District v. Whittle Communications, L. P.

28 Cal. App. 4th 998 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 27, 1994

Veterans’ Welfare Board v. Riley (1922) 189 Cal. 159, 164-166 [ 208 P. 678 , 22 A.L.R. 1531 ] [special educational opportunities for veterans]; University of So. California v. … Schempp (1963) 374 U.S. 203, 226 [ 10 L.Ed.2d 844, 860-861 , 83 S.Ct. 1560 ]) or ideological (cf., e.g., Board of Education v.

Katosh v. Sonoma County Employees' Retirement Ass'n

163 Cal. App. 4th 56 · California Court of Appeal · May 21, 2008

(Weber v. Board of Retirement, supra, 62 Cal.App.4th 1440, 1452 .) … (Hallett v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Board (2000) 431 Mass. 66, 70 [ 725 N.E.2d 222, 225 ], quoting Boston Ass’n of School Adm’rs & Supervisors v.

Wilcox v. Sway

69 Cal. App. 2d 560 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 13, 1945

Wilson, 45 Cal.App. 123 [ 188 P. 87 ]; Stoner v. Security Trust Co., 47 Cal.App. 216 [ 190 P. 500 ]; Howe v. Schmidt, 151 Cal. 436 [ 90 P. 1056 ]; Carey v. Brown, 58 Cal. 180 ; Kendrick v. … Fifty dollars a month, room and board. ‘ ‘ Q. What do you estimate her room and board is valued at ? A. About forty dollars a month.”

Consolidated Liquidating Corp. v. Ford

131 Cal. App. 2d 576 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 18, 1955

(Stewart Law & Collection Co. v. County of Alameda, 142 Cal. 660, 665 [ 76 P. 481 ].) “Independent” as used in the last above sentence means not subject to control by others, not subordinate. (Webster’s Inter. Dict.) … The other contentions of appellants have been answered by this court in Hochfelder v. County of Los Angeles, 126 Cal.App.2d 370 [ 272 P.2d 844 ], decided after this appeal had *580 been lodged.