50 Cited authorities

  1. Reichardt v. Hoffman

    52 Cal.App.4th 754 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 612 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that absent an exceptional showing of good cause, an appellate court will not address issues raised for the first time in a reply brief
  2. Kim v. Sumitomo Bank

    17 Cal.App.4th 974 (Cal. Ct. App. 1993)   Cited 504 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Rejecting the existence of a fiduciary relationship between a bank and borrower
  3. New Motor Vehicle Bd. of Cal. v. Orrin W. Fox Co.

    439 U.S. 96 (1978)   Cited 222 times
    Recognizing State interest in regulating dealer-manufacturer relationship
  4. Tidewater Marine Western, Inc. v. Bradshaw

    14 Cal.4th 557 (Cal. 1996)   Cited 292 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Holding that DLSE Enforcement Manual was not entitled to higher level of deference accorded a regulation because it was not adopted consistent with the Administrative Procedures Act's requirements of public notice and comment
  5. Neighbours v. Buzz Oates Enterprises

    217 Cal.App.3d 325 (Cal. Ct. App. 1990)   Cited 318 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Neighbours, the court noted that section 2750.5 may occasionally "create a dual employment situation in which one employer is granted immunity from a personal injury action at law even though the employer's insurer is not responsible for payment of workers' compensation benefits to the injured employee...."
  6. Blue Cross v. Philip Morris

    3 N.Y.3d 200 (N.Y. 2004)   Cited 166 times
    Holding "that a third-party payer has no standing to bring an action under [GBL section] 349 because its claims are too remote" and "that what is required [under section 349] is that the party actually injured be the one to bring suit"
  7. Engel v. CBS, Inc.

    93 N.Y.2d 195 (N.Y. 1999)   Cited 181 times
    Holding that the special injury requirement in wrongful civil proceedings does not require the actual imposition of a provisional remedy; what is required is "some concrete harm that is considerably more cumbersome than the physical, psychological or financial demands of defending a lawsuit"
  8. American Drug Stores, Inc. v. Stroh

    10 Cal.App.4th 1446 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992)   Cited 210 times
    In American Drug Stores, Inc. v. Stroh (1992) 10 Cal.App.4th 1446, the Court of Appeal held that "where a matter is within the purview of the ABC, an action seeking a judgment which will interfere with the agency's prospective disciplinary orders is beyond the jurisdiction of the superior court," even though the licensee styles the action as one for injunction or declaratory relief.
  9. McElroy v. United States

    455 U.S. 642 (1982)   Cited 59 times
    Rejecting a narrow reading of § 2314 that was at odds with Congress' "broad purpose" and that would "undercut sharply . . . federal prosecutors in their effort to combat crime in interstate commerce"
  10. Ryan v. California Interscholastic Federation-San Diego Section

    94 Cal.App.4th 1048 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001)   Cited 104 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Upholding CIF authority to enact and enforce eligibility determinations
  11. Section 463 - Unfair business practices by franchisors

    N.Y. Veh. & Traf. Law § 463   Cited 50 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Providing that a franchisor may not "refuse to accept a return of" a terminated franchisee's inventory and must pay fair and reasonable compensation when repurchasing the inventory
  12. Rule 2.108 - Spacing and numbering of lines

    Cal. R. 2.108   Cited 7 times

    The spacing and numbering of lines on a page must be as follows: (1) The lines on each page must be one and one-half spaced or double-spaced and numbered consecutively. (2) Descriptions of real property may be single-spaced. (3) Footnotes, quotations, and printed forms of corporate surety bonds and undertakings may be single-spaced and have unnumbered lines if they comply generally with the space requirements of rule 2.111. (4) Line numbers must be placed at the left margin and separated from the