Case law

Brown v. Valverde

183 Cal. App. 4th 1531 · California Court of Appeal · Apr 23, 2010

Putting Pitchess motions in the hands of anyone less than fully qualified would undermine one of the primary purposes of the Pitchess procedures, protecting the confidentiality and privacy of the officer. (Alford v. … It restricts access only to those instances in which access is clearly needed in order to insure fair trial. It prohibits access to complaints which are unfounded or which are very old.

Masonite Corp. v. Superior Court

25 Cal. App. 4th 1045 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 9, 1994

(a)), and to submit that plan to the local district, in this case MCAQMD, which may not approve it unless the plan meets specified conditions, one of which is compliance with requirements established by the state board. ( … CHU argues that, to be protected, trade secrets must be included in a facility diagram and, further, that only information classified as “data used to calculate emissions data” qualifies for *1055 such protection.

National Lawyers Guild v. City of Hayward

California Court of Appeal · Sep 28, 2018

On appeal, there is no dispute these videos qualify as public records subject to disclosure under the CPRA. 3 The Department instituted its “body-worn camera” program in 2014 and typically generates about … The CPRA thus includes a “catchall” provision— section 6255, subdivision (a)—that exempts disclosure if “ ‘the public interest served by not disclosing the record clearly outweighs the public interest served by disclosure

Mojave Pistachios, LLC v. Super. Ct.

California Court of Appeal · Feb 8, 2024

Under this program, the Authority established a transient pool of 51,000 acre-feet of groundwater and determined that all qualified agricultural pumpers would receive a transient pool allotment based on their reported agricultural … Ten agricultural pumpers, including Mojave, were deemed “‘potentially’ qualified” to participate in the program.

Bailon v. Appellate Division

98 Cal. App. 4th 1331 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 3, 2002

Well, clearly what’s happened is the case has been continued, and then the question is whether or not there’s been good cause. . . .” (Italics added.) … The court obtained Ballon’s waiver of his fundamental right to have his trial start *1348 no later than December 24 qualified by this express limitation.

Powerhouse Motorsports v. Yamaha Motor Corp.

California Court of Appeal · Dec 24, 2013

As Hardin clearly states, "The jurisdiction of the New Motor Vehicle Board [ ] has limits." (Hardin, supra, 52 Cal.App.4th at p. 587.) … We conclude that Fresno Motors is inapposite and relies, not on California precedent, but rather a Ninth Circuit case that did not rely on or cite Applied Equipment and did not concern the immunity of a noncontractual party

Moore v. Centrelake Medical Group, Inc.

California Court of Appeal · Sep 16, 2022

In other words, the plaintiff must 17 have suffered a “loss or deprivation of money or property sufficient to qualify as injury in fact, i.e., economic injury . . . .” (Kwikset Corp. v. … “[A] ‘benefit of the bargain’ approach to establishing UCL standing is rooted in the California Supreme Court’s recognition that a plaintiff may demonstrate economic injury from unfair competition by establishing he or she

People v. Superior Court

110 Cal. Rptr. 2d 668 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 10, 2001

Finally, even if we deem the language of section 707, subdivision (d) susceptible of an interpretation that would support indictment, the language of section 602, subdivision (b) clearly is not. … or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the victim or another person. flO (G) Lewd and lascivious acts on a child under the age of 14 years, as defined in subdivision (a) of Section 288, unless the defendant qualifies

People v. Brown CA2/2

California Court of Appeal · Nov 18, 2022

First, defendant argues that a person’s “participation” in an armed robbery is not enough to establish that he was a major participant who acted with reckless indifference to human life. … For the reasons explained above, defendant’s particular role in this particular robbery qualifies him as a major participant who was recklessly indifferent to human life.

White v. Maksimow CA4/1

California Court of Appeal · Mar 16, 2015

"To qualify for a permanent injunction, the plaintiff must prove (1) the elements of a cause of action involving the wrongful act sought to be enjoined . . . ; and (2) the grounds for equitable relief." ( San Diego Unified … Superior court proceedings are clearly covered as a "judicial proceeding." (Civ. Code, § 47, subd. (b).)

People v. Darby

114 Cal. App. 2d 412 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 26, 1952

Those provisions require all laws of a general nature to have a uniform operation and forbid the Legislature to confer special privileges or immunities or to impose a less penalty on one class of persons arbitrarily selected … Clearly then, such a trustee is either a state or county officer and as such is under the ban of section 1090, and if guilty is punishable pursuant to section 1097.

People v. Bocanegra

California Court of Appeal · Apr 28, 2023

It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this chapter to place restrictions on the use of assault weapons and to establish a registration and permit procedure for their lawful sale and possession. … If it was believed that certain weapons that otherwise might qualify as assault weapons were in common use for the lawful purpose of self-defense at the time, then certainly these weapons, like “legitimate hunting rifles,

Gillespie v. Ormsby

126 Cal. App. 2d 513 · California Court of Appeal · Jul 14, 1954

At that time, plaintiff, who was a relatively young man, was desirous of establishing a career in the oil business. … As has been established, it was one of plaintiff’s covenants under the contract to do so in the event oil was not discovered in paying quantities at 1,900 feet.

In re Ernesto L.

California Court of Appeal · Jul 12, 2022

Ernesto then filed a brief arguing that section 602.3 did not apply to him because he did not commit a qualifying offense. … Although Ernesto argued otherwise below, it is uncontested on appeal that he committed a qualifying offense under section 602.3. (See Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd.

Boccardo v. Safeway Stores, Inc.

134 Cal. App. 3d 1037 · California Court of Appeal · Aug 13, 1982

Although the record does not establish explicitly the reason for the federal court’s denial of appellants’ motion to amend, the circumstances of the case strongly indicate that the denial was not a discretionary refusal to … If however, the court in the first action would clearly not have had jurisdiction to entertain the omitted theory or ground (or, having jurisdiction, would clearly have declined to exercise it as a matter of discretion),

Santa Clara County Department of Family & Children's Services v. C.K.

190 Cal. App. 4th 102 · California Court of Appeal · Nov 18, 2010

The court concluded that the parents had not established the sibling relationship exception. … established.

Adams v. Strathspey Crown Holdings Group CA4/3

California Court of Appeal · May 20, 2026

While adhesion is “‘sufficient to establish some degree of procedural unconscionability,’” “[a] higher degree of procedural unconscionability may be established through an additional showing of oppression or surprise.” … New Cingular Wireless Services, Inc. (9th Cir. 2007) 498 F.3d 976, 985 [“Although there is clearly some disagreement among the California Courts of Appeal over this issue [citations], we have consistently followed the courts

Estate of Moynes CA1/2

California Court of Appeal · Dec 11, 2013

Code, § 820.21 and withdrawing immunity from government employees who obtain “testimony by . . . undue influence, as defined in Section 1575 of the Civil Code.”) … Moynes’s physical limitations were sufficient to qualify her as a dependent adult without need to consider her mental condition.

People v. Meredith

174 Cal. App. 4th 1257 · California Court of Appeal · Jun 15, 2009

(b)-(i), 1170.12) which also qualified as a five-year enhancement (Pen. Code, § 667, subd. (a)). … So viewed, the evidence established that defendant entered Olsen’s premises illicitly and thereafter possessed items of his property which were normally kept in his residence.

Apple v. Davis CA2/8

California Court of Appeal · Nov 3, 2015

August 28, 2014. 7 539 (Wilson), the court held a defect in the notice of appeal identifying the date of judgment appealed from “does not invalidate the appeal, [if] it clearly … From this set of facts, a reasonable inference is established Lalaine lived with her mother “(c) A minor, whether or not qualified under subdivision (a) or (b), if, at the time of the decedent’s death, the minor