§Why CasetextPricing

Response Reply

undefined

17 Cited authorities

  1. Weddington Productions, Inc. v. Flick

    60 Cal.App.4th 793 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 504 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an agreement "must not only contain all the material terms but also express each in a reasonably definite manner."

  2. D'Amico v. Board of Medical Examiners

    11 Cal.3d 1 (Cal. 1974)   Cited 1,073 times
    In D'Amico v. Board of Medical Examiners, 11 Cal.3d 1, 112 Cal.Rptr. 786, 520 P.2d 10 (Cal. 1974), the state Supreme Court held that the 1962 initiative Act's prohibition of future licensing of osteopaths violated the Equal Protection Clause of both the federal and state constitutions, because the state could not demonstrate a rational relation to a legitimate governmental objective.

  3. Truong v. Glasser

    181 Cal.App.4th 102 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 108 times
    Finding the court's power to deny a motion for summary judgment due to failure to comply with formatting requirements is "discretionary, not mandatory"

  4. Richman v. Hartley

    224 Cal.App.4th 1182 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014)   Cited 95 times
    Stating the elements of such a claim under California law

  5. Ochs v. PacifiCare of California

    115 Cal.App.4th 782 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 100 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding such a cause of action exists

  6. Ladas v. California State Auto. Assn.

    19 Cal.App.4th 761 (Cal. Ct. App. 1993)   Cited 117 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding "fees are not authorized for exhibits not used at trial" under section 1033.5, subdivision

  7. Visueta v. General Motors Corp.

    234 Cal.App.3d 1609 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991)   Cited 82 times
    In Visueta, the plaintiff alleged that a truck's parking brake lever was inaccessibly placed, causing an accident when the truck was unable to stop after failing to make a turn.

  8. Casenas v. Fujisawa USA, Inc.

    58 Cal.App.4th 101 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 19 times
    Applying Turner to sexual harassment and retaliation claims

  9. Joslin v. Gertz

    155 Cal.App.2d 62 (Cal. Ct. App. 1957)   Cited 6 times

    Docket No. 22328. November 8, 1957. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Luis Obispo County. Ray B. Lyon, Judge. Affirmed. Action on an open book account and an account stated. Judgment for plaintiff affirmed. Alfred E. Frazier for Appellant. Charles E. Ogle for Respondent. FOX, J. Plaintiff provided her sister (Jo Guynn), the deceased herein, funds for the purchase of a home. Reimbursement not having been made prior to the sister's death on May 15, 1955, plaintiff filed a claim with

  10. Section 801 - Expert witness opinion testimony

    Cal. Evid. Code § 801   Cited 2,468 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Limiting expert testimony to opinions related to a subject that is sufficiently beyond common experience that the opinion would assist the trier of fact, and based on matter including special knowledge that is of a type that reasonably may be relied upon by an expert in forming an opinion

  11. Section 1200 - Hearsay rule

    Cal. Evid. Code § 1200   Cited 2,235 times
    Prohibiting the introduction of "a statement that was made other than by a witness while testifying at the hearing and that is offered to prove the truth of the matter stated" subject to certain exceptions

  12. Section 403 - Conditional admittance of proffered evidence

    Cal. Evid. Code § 403   Cited 567 times
    Speaking of burden of production as well as burden of proof

  13. Section 702 - Personal knowledge required

    Cal. Evid. Code § 702   Cited 566 times
    Qualifying as an expert witness

  14. Section 437 - Grounds for motion to appear on face of challenged pleading; motion based on matter subject to judicial notice

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 437   Cited 290 times   3 Legal Analyses

    (a) The grounds for a motion to strike shall appear on the face of the challenged pleading or from any matter of which the court is required to take judicial notice. (b) Where the motion to strike is based on matter of which the court may take judicial notice pursuant to Section 452 or 453 of the Evidence Code, such matter shall be specified in the notice of motion, or in the supporting points and authorities, except as the court may otherwise permit. Ca. Civ. Proc. Code § 437 Added by Stats. 1982

  15. Section 1523 - Oral testimony

    Cal. Evid. Code § 1523   Cited 166 times

    (a) Except as otherwise provided by statute, oral testimony is not admissible to prove the content of a writing. (b) Oral testimony of the content of a writing is not made inadmissible by subdivision (a) if the proponent does not have possession or control of a copy of the writing and the original is lost or has been destroyed without fraudulent intent on the part of the proponent of the evidence. (c) Oral testimony of the content of a writing is not made inadmissible by subdivision (a) if the proponent

  16. Section 1521 - Secondary evidence rule

    Cal. Evid. Code § 1521   Cited 136 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing "[t]he content of a writing may be proved by otherwise admissible secondary evidence"

  17. Rule 3.1350 - Motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication

    Cal. R. 3.1350   Cited 233 times

    (a) Definitions As used in this rule, (1) "Motion" refers to either a motion for summary judgment or a motion for summary adjudication. (2) "Material facts" are facts that relate to the cause of action, claim for damages, issue of duty, or affirmative defense that is the subject of the motion and that could make a difference in the disposition of the motion. (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2016.) (b) Motion for summary adjudication If made in the alternative, a motion for summary adjudication