26 Cited authorities

  1. Int'l Shoe Co. v. Washington

    326 U.S. 310 (1945)   Cited 23,015 times   110 Legal Analyses
    Holding that states may exercise personal jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants with "certain minimum contacts with [the forum] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend ‘traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice’ " (quoting Milliken v. Meyer , 311 U.S. 457, 463, 61 S.Ct. 339, 85 L.Ed. 278 (1940) )
  2. Merrill v. Navegar, Inc.

    26 Cal.4th 465 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 1,246 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Restating the same criteria for exceptions from the rule set forth in section 1714
  3. Sonora Diamond Corp. v. Superior Court

    83 Cal.App.4th 523 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000)   Cited 664 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the alter ego doctrine is a mechanism for imposing liability on a parent company for the actions of its subsidiaries whereas single entity liability applies to sister corporations
  4. O'Neil v. Crane Co.

    53 Cal.4th 335 (Cal. 2012)   Cited 203 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Holding that product manufacturer is not liable under any theory for harm caused by a third party's products
  5. Snowney v. Harrah's Entertainment, Inc.

    35 Cal.4th 1054 (Cal. 2005)   Cited 153 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Snowney, a California resident filed a class action in this state against a group of Nevada hotels, alleging several causes of action related to their purported failure to provide notice of an energy surcharge imposed on hotel guests.
  6. Duronslet v. Kamps

    203 Cal.App.4th 717 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012)   Cited 126 times
    Holding physician-patient privilege does not apply to nurses or other medical staff working under physician's supervision or acting as physician's agent
  7. Gould v. Maryland Sound Industries, Inc.

    31 Cal.App.4th 1137 (Cal. Ct. App. 1995)   Cited 190 times
    Holding that discharge to avoid payment of wages is cognizable in tort as a wrongful discharge
  8. Align Technology, Inc. v. Tran

    179 Cal.App.4th 949 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 80 times
    Holding "legislative purpose of former section 439, the predecessor of section 426.30 . . . was to provide for the settlement, in a single action, of all conflicting claims between the parties arising out of the same transaction" and to "avoid a multiplicity of actions"
  9. Blanco v. Baxter Healthcare Corp.

    158 Cal.App.4th 1039 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 76 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding plaintiff's breach of implied warranty claim failed because plaintiff could not allege privity with a heart valve manufacturer
  10. Viaview, Inc. v. Retzlaff

    1 Cal.App.5th 198 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016)   Cited 54 times
    In ViaView, the defendant filed a motion to quash in addition to other motions concurrently with, or after, he filed the motion to quash.