Case law

Low v. Trump University, LLC

246 F. Supp. 3d 1295 · District Court, S.D. California · Mar 31, 2017

Indeed, Denney v. … John Brown Brown took the initiative to foster relationships with, and encourage, the other Class Representatives, particularly as trial approached. (See Low, Dkt. No. 590-1 at 11; Cohen, Dkt. No. 295-1 at 11.)

Adams v. Decoto

21 F.2d 221 · District Court, S.D. California · Aug 1, 1927

In the case of Napa Valley Electric Co. v. Railroad Commission of California et al., 251 U. S. 366 , 40 S. Ct. 174 , 64 L. … the state Supreme Court refused a writ of review, exhibited the board’s proceedings and presented the questions which that court was empowered to decide,* viz. whether the board pursued its authority and whether any constitutional

Carver v. Haynes

37 F. Supp. 607 · District Court, S.D. California · Feb 26, 1941

United States Shipping Board Emergency Fleet Corp., D.C., 1919, 261 F. 716 ; (3) Federal Sugar Refining Co. v. United States Sugar Equalization Board, D.C., 1920, 268 F. 575 ; (4) Keifer & Keifer v. … Wylie v. State Board of Equalization, D. C., *614 21 F.Supp. 604 ; Dollar S. S. Lines v. Merz, 9 Cir., 68 F.2d 594 ; Goldstein v. Sommervell, 170 Misc. 602 , 10 N.Y.S.2d 747 ; Nagle v.

Lake v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc.

140 F. Supp. 707 · District Court, S.D. California · Jan 5, 1956

Co., 10 Cir., 1938, 98 F.2d 872, 873 , 119 A.L.R. 1250 ; American Code Co. v. Bensinger, 2 Cir., 1922, 282 F. 829, 834 ; Shipman v. R.K.O. … De Acosta v. Brown, 2 Cir., 1944, 146 F.2d 408, 410 , certiorari denied Hearst Magazines v.

In Re MDC Holdings Securities Litigation

754 F. Supp. 785 · District Court, S.D. California · Dec 12, 1990

Williams v. Canon, Inc., 432 F.Supp. 376, 380 (C.D.Cal.1977). Plaintiffs also note that the LBA-nominated board members of DBL Group voted to approve the settlement between Drexel and the SEC. … The rule also applies to the board of directors. Blake v. Dierdorff, 856 F.2d 1365, 1369 (9th Cir.1988). Plaintiffs argue that the relaxed Wool standard should be extended to apply to the individual Drexel defendants.

Vitelli v. Warden

247 F. Supp. 993 · District Court, S.D. California · Dec 21, 1965

In Beard v. … The court analogized this case to Harmon v.

Porter v. Schaefer

69 F. Supp. 1013 · District Court, S.D. California · Oct 24, 1946

The Administrator cites the following decisions as authority for his contention that defendant, even though only a salesman, is liable under § 205(e) of the Act: Brown v. … Basing its decision upon Brown v. Cummins Distilleries, Corp., supra, the court held the attorney-in-fact liable as the legal representative of the owner within the meaning of § 302(h). McFadden v.

Brown

District Court, S.D. California · Dec 29, 2025

In Beck v. … In Tipton v.

Herrera v. AllianceOne Receivable Management, Inc.

170 F. Supp. 3d 1282 · District Court, S.D. California · Mar 17, 2016

However, in Franasiak v. … Thornton v. City of St.

In Re Los Angeles Lumber Products Co.

37 F. Supp. 708 · District Court, S.D. California · Feb 8, 1941

Nor were such purchases, or any of them, subsequently approved or ratified by said board or by the Court. … Co., 7 Cir., 109 F.2d 407 , certiorari denied, Norcor Co. v. Schmitt, 310 U.S. 625 , 60 S.Ct. 898 , 84 L.Ed. 1396 ; Pepper v.

Webster v. Davis

109 F. Supp. 149 · District Court, S.D. California · Dec 5, 1952

It was impossible while the boats were in that position to board the Deep C from the float except by first boarding the other boat and stepping from her onto the Deep C. … Although not a passenger case, see also Socony-Vacuum Oil Company v.

Larrabee v. United States

254 F. Supp. 613 · District Court, S.D. California · May 18, 1966

Bruce v. United States, 167 F.Supp. 579 (S.D.Calif.1958). The doctrine may be invoked when there is no definite proof of causation. The Supreme Court of California, in the case of Quintal v. … The question of fixing damages for loss of use of an eye was before this court in the case of Owen v.

Home Savings and Loan Association v. United States

223 F. Supp. 134 · District Court, S.D. California · Sep 5, 1963

but not a majority of such Board), and the vote of two-thirds (%rds) of such shareholders was a requirement for the merger. … West Seattle National Bank of Seattle v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 288 F.2d 47 (9th Cir. 1961); Calavo, Inc. v.

Kell v. Zermatten

101 F. Supp. 898 · District Court, S.D. California · Jan 24, 1952

Captain Kell and his craw boarded the Coast Guard plane and were by them returned to San Diego, California. … V The cross-libelant Earl C. Axtell, Jr., and Laur Koozmin have and recover their costs of suit from the cross-respondent George Kell.

The Pegeen

14 F. Supp. 748 · District Court, S.D. California · Apr 30, 1936

There were on board eight persons, guests of Shaw. The owners were not on board. The Pegeen proceeded to the Isthmus, Santa Catalina Island, where she anchored about 10:45 a. m. … on board and injury to a number of others.

Sharaiha v. Hoy

169 F. Supp. 598 · District Court, S.D. California · Jan 14, 1959

The Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed his appeal. Thereafter, this action was commenced. In his complaint, plaintiff asks for a declaratory judgment to the effect that he is not deportable. … In conclusion, it is to be noted' that the findings of the Special Inquiry Officer and those of the Board of Immigration Appeals are inconsistent as to exactly which paper had been sworn to by plaintiff.

Lockheed Overseas Corp. v. Pillsbury

58 F. Supp. 375 · District Court, S.D. California · Dec 12, 1944

It can clearly be seen that the facts in the Ellers case, Ellers v. Railroad Retirement Board, 2 Cir., 132 F.2d 636 , and in the one before the court, are considerably at variance. … This question was considered in Re Bruno v. Railroad Retirement Board, D.

Ex parte Lee Bock Fook

40 F. Supp. 937 · District Court, S.D. California · Jun 16, 1941

Thereupon the Board of Special Inquiry rendered its decision to the effect that the Board likewise had not changed its mind, and accordingly again ordered the applicant excluded. … Accordingly, upon the authority of Carmichael v. Wong Choon Ock, 119 F.2d 173 , and Quan Toon Jung v.

Smith v. United Transportation Union Local No. 81

594 F. Supp. 96 · District Court, S.D. California · May 21, 1984

Patsy v. Florida Board of Regents, 457 U.S. 496, 512-16 , 102 S.Ct. 2557, 2566-68 , 73 L.Ed.2d 172 (1982). This is a “flat rule without exception,” Heath v. … Detroit Board of Education, 431 U.S. 209 , 97 S.Ct. 1782 , 52 L.Ed.2d 261 (1977); Ellis v. B.R. A.C., — U.S. —, 104 S.Ct. 59 , 78 L.Ed.2d 77 (1984).

Aldasoro v. Kennerson

922 F. Supp. 339 · District Court, S.D. California · Aug 4, 1995

In 1979 the two Boards separated. In 1983 the El Centro School District Board was expanded from three seats to the current five Board seats. 7. … Thornburg, 478 U.S. at 48 , 106 S.Ct. at 2765 ; Overton v. City *368 of Austin, 871 F.2d 529, 538 (5th Cir.1989); Williams v. State Board of Elections, 718 F.Supp. 1324, 1328 (N.D.Ill.1989); Valladolid v.