Case law

People v. Ryner

164 Cal. App. 3d 1075 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 25, 1985

(People v. Brown (1980) 110 Cal.App.3d 24, 36 [ 167 Cal.Rptr. 557 ].) The prosecutor made additional statements during his closing argument which find no support in the record. … (People v.

Continental Insurance v. Columbus Line, Inc.

133 Cal. Rptr. 2d 199 · California Court of Appeal · May 2, 2003

Before being loaded on board defendant’s ship, the mast was damaged. The damage was so severe that the mast could not be loaded on defendant’s ship and carried to New Zealand. … .); Wuerttembergische v. M/V Stuttgart Express (5th Cir. 1983) 711 F.2d 621, 622 ; Brown & Root, Inc. v. M/V Peisander (5th Cir. 1981) 648 F.2d 415, 420 .)

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.

Zepeda v. International Hodcarriers' Building & Common Laborers' Union

143 Cal. App. 2d 609 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 1, 1956

He cites such authorities as Weber v. Marine Cooks’ & Stewards’ Assn., 93 Cal.App.2d 327 [ 208 P.2d 1009 ]; Harris v. National *613 Union etc. Cooks & Stewards, 98 Cal.App.2d 733 [ 221 P.2d 136 ] ; Smith v. … Union v. Bowen, 278 P. 271 , at page 274-275: “. . .

Aetna Indemnity Co. v. Altadena Mining & Investment Co.

11 Cal. App. 165 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 21, 1909

In Breeze v. … Works v. Smith, supra, Mr.

Mitri v. Arnel Management Co.

69 Cal. Rptr. 3d 223 · California Court of Appeal · Dec 12, 2007

Brown & Root, Inc., established in and of itself the employer’s dispute resolution program, and did not include an express requirement that its employees sign an arbitration agreement. Therefore, Craig v. … Brown & Root, Inc., is inapposite.

Ron Yates Construction Co. v. Superior Court

186 Cal. App. 3d 337 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 9, 1986

As the Court of Appeal explained in Scally v. … As the court stated in People 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.

People v. Jefferson

230 Cal. App. 2d 151 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 16, 1964

When appellant Jefferson answered the questions, the officer noticed a brown paper cigarette in his mouth and a brown leafy substance adhering to his lips. The officer believed it was a narcotic. … In Silverman v.

Cunningham v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co.

87 Cal. App. 2d 106 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 4, 1948

(White v. Spreckels, 10 Cal.App. 287 [ 101 P. 920 ]; Judson v. Giant Powder Co., 107 Cal. 549 [ 40 P. 1020 , 48 Am.St.Rep. 146 , 29 L.R.A. 718 ].) … (Brown v. Board of Trustees, 41 Cal. App. 100 [ 182 P. 316 ]; Olson v. Whitthorne & Swan, 203 Cal. 206 [ 263 P. 518 , 58 A.L.R. 129 ].) In Scellars v.

Wilson v. Walters

66 Cal. App. 2d 1 · California Court of Appeal · Sep 21, 1944

(Chaffee v. Browne, 109 Cal. 211 , 218 [ 41 P. 1028 ]; State etc. Co. v. Cochran, 130 Cal. 245, 251 [ 62 P. 466, 600 ]; Concannon v. Smith, 134 Cal. 14 [ 66 P. 40 ].) An actual promise to pay is not necessary. … (McCormick v. Brown, 36 Cal. 180 [95 Am.Dec. 170]; Daniels v. Johnson, 129 Cal. 415 , [ 79 Am.St.Rep. 123 , 61 P. 1107 ]; Rodgers v. Byers, 127 Cal. 528 [ 60 P. 42 ].)”

People v. Plywood Mfrs. of Cal.

137 Cal. App. Supp. 2d 859 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 21, 1955

Again we find the restrictive words in Cantrell v. Board of Supervisors (1948), 87 Cal.App.2d 471, 477 [ 197 P.2d 218, 222 ]: "Courts may take judicial knowledge of scientific facts which are commonly recognized." … Sulphur Compounds calculated as sulphur dioxides (SO2): 0.2 per cent, by volume." [29] We are of the opinion that an air pollution board may not, and by its adoption of rule 53 the Los Angeles board did not attempt to, exempt

Kleefeld v. Superior Court

25 Cal. App. 4th 1680 · California Court of Appeal · May 16, 1994

(Gutierrez v. Mofid (1985) 39 Cal.3d 892, 896 [ 218 Cal.Rptr. 313 , 705 P.2d 886 ].) Plaintiff calls our attention to the case of Steingart v. White (1988) 198 Cal.App.3d 406 [ 243 Cal.Rptr. 678 ]. … (Steingart v. White, supra, 198 Cal.App.3d at pp. 414-415.)

Wicktor v. County of Los Angeles

177 Cal. App. 2d 390 · California Court of Appeal · Jan 25, 1960

Language in Wicktor v. County of Los Angeles, 141 Cal.App.2d 592 , 596 et seq. [ 297 P.2d 115 ], Nichols v. Board of Retirement, 121 Cal. App.2d 176, 180 [ 262 P.2d 862 ], and Shaw v. … (Shaw v. Board of Administration, supra, and cases there cited.)” Shaw v.

California School Employees Ass'n v. King City Union Elementary School District

116 Cal. App. 3d 695 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 10, 1981

(Bourland v. … (See Lucas v. Board of Trustees *703 (1971) 18 Cal.App.3d 988, 992 [ 96 Cal.Rptr. 431 ].)

Responsible Citizens v. SUPERIOR COURT OF FRESNO CTY.

16 Cal. App. 4th 1717 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 1, 1993

Hutton & Company v. Brown (S.D.Tex. 1969) 305 F.Supp. 371, 394 , fns. omitted; see also Industrial Indem. Co. v. Great American Ins. … Hutton & Company v. Brown, supra, 305 F.Supp. at pp. 393-394; Developments in the Law—Conflicts of Interest in the Legal Profession (1981) 94 Harv.L.Rev. 1244, 1292-1315.)

Anaheim City School District v. County of Orange

164 Cal. App. 3d 697 · California Court of Appeal · Feb 8, 1985

(Garden Grove Sanitary Dist. v. County of Orange, supra, 162 Cal.App.3d 842, 849 .) … (Regents of University of California v. City of Los Angeles (1979) 100 Cal.App.3d 547, 549 [ 160 Cal.Rptr. 925 ].) Appellants’ premise is correct; their conclusion is not. In County of Riverside v.

People v. Ralph

67 Cal. App. 270 · California Court of Appeal · May 13, 1924

It is urged that the board of education of a chartered city is not a city board. The contrary has been held. (Stern v. City Council of Berkeley, 25 Cal. App. 685, 689 [ 145 Pac. 167 ].) … (Ehat v. Scheidt, 17 Cal. App. 430, 436 [ 120 Pac. 49 ].) The natural inference from his answer, however, is that he had, in substance at least, made such statement.

People v. Parish

59 Cal. App. 302 · California Court of Appeal · Oct 9, 1922

(People v. Jordan, 172 Cal. 399 [ 156 Pac. 451 ].) … L. 782; People v. Tapia, 131 Cal. 647 [ 63 Pac. 1001 ]; People v. Thompson, 115 Cal. 160 [ 46 Pac. 912 ].)

People v. Combs

165 Cal. App. 3d 422 · California Court of Appeal · Mar 7, 1985

In it were discovered a brown bottle containing eight cubic centimeters of ether solution containing phencyclidine, and about two pounds of PCC, a chemical precursor of phencyclidine. … (See, e.g., People v. Towler (1982) 31 Cal.3d 105, 118 [ 181 Cal.Rptr. 391 , 641 P.2d 1253 ]; People v. Johnson (1980) 26 Cal.3d 557, 577-578 [ 162 Cal.Rptr. 431 , 606 P.2d 738 , 16 A.L.R.4th 1255 ].)