§Why CasetextPricing

Minute Order

undefined

22 Cited authorities

  1. Badie v. Bank of America

    67 Cal.App.4th 779 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 1,247 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a credit card company could not introduce an alternative dispute resolution provision through a "bill stuffer" where nothing in the original agreement mentioned dispute resolution

  2. McKell v. Washington Mutual Inc.

    142 Cal.App.4th 1457 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 695 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a loan transaction is a business practice under the UCL

  3. Romano v. Rockwell Internat., Inc.

    14 Cal.4th 479 (Cal. 1996)   Cited 572 times
    Holding that a FEHA action for discriminatory discharge does not commence until the actual discharge

  4. Fremont Indemnity Co. v. Fremont General Corp.

    148 Cal.App.4th 97 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 348 times
    Holding a net operating loss as intangible property

  5. People v. Dougherty

    138 Cal.App.3d 278 (Cal. Ct. App. 1982)   Cited 218 times

    Docket No. 5332. November 17, 1982. Appeal from Superior Court of Tulare County, No. 19640, William Silveira, Jr., Judge. COUNSEL J.M. Lopes for Defendant and Appellant. George Deukmejian, Attorney General, Robert H. Philibosian, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Arnold O. Overoye, Assistant Attorney General, Charles P. Just and Clayton S. Tanaka, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. OPINION THE COURT. Before Brown (G.A.), P.J., Zenovich, J., and Woolpert, J. Appellant was convicted

  6. Nasrawi v. Buck Consultants LLC

    231 Cal.App.4th 328 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014)   Cited 60 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that to aid and abet a breach of fiduciary duty, the plaintiff must plead that the defendant had actual knowledge of the breach and provided substantial assistance or encouragement in it

  7. Davaloo v. State Farm Ins. Co.

    135 Cal.App.4th 409 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 68 times
    Holding that the court's analysis requires a comparison of the factual allegations in the original and amended complaints

  8. Aragon-Haas v. Family Security Ins. Services, Inc.

    231 Cal.App.3d 232 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991)   Cited 94 times
    Holding that rational interpretation of contracts, including merger clauses, requires at least a "preliminary consideration of all credible evidence offered to prove the intention of the parties"

  9. Church v. Jamison

    143 Cal.App.4th 1568 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 43 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Taking judicial notice on its own motion on appeal of the Enforcement Policies and Interpretations Manual of the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement

  10. Wal-Noon Corp. v. Hill

    45 Cal.App.3d 605 (Cal. Ct. App. 1975)   Cited 110 times
    In Wal-Noon Corp. v. Hill (1975) 45 Cal.App.3d 605, at page 615, 119 Cal.Rptr. 646, the court followed Lawrence and expressly framed the issue in section 1577 ’s terms, stating "Failure to make reasonable inquiry to ascertain or effort to understand the meaning and content of the contract upon which one relies constitutes neglect of a legal duty such as will preclude recovery for unilateral mistake of fact."

  11. Rule 3.1113 - Memorandum

    Cal. R. 3.1113   Cited 99 times

    (a) Memorandum in support of motion A party filing a motion, except for a motion listed in rule 3.1114, must serve and file a supporting memorandum. The court may construe the absence of a memorandum as an admission that the motion or special demurrer is not meritorious and cause for its denial and, in the case of a demurrer, as a waiver of all grounds not supported. (b) Contents of memorandum The memorandum must contain a statement of facts, a concise statement of the law, evidence and arguments