§Why CasetextPricing

Opposition Objections

undefined

6 Cited authorities

  1. Hunt v. Superior Court of Sacramento County

    21 Cal.4th 984 (Cal. 1999)   Cited 193 times
    Indicating that judgments do not become final for separation of powers purposes until both the trial and appellate process is complete, and the case is no longer pending in the courts

  2. Continental Baking Co. v. Katz

    68 Cal.2d 512 (Cal. 1968)   Cited 309 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Continental Baking, this court explained the theory behind this two-pronged test: "`[By] balancing the respective equities of the parties, [the court] concludes that, pending a trial on the merits, the defendant should or that he should not be restrained from exercising the right claimed by him.'"

  3. Shoemaker v. County of Los Angeles

    37 Cal.App.4th 618 (Cal. Ct. App. 1995)   Cited 70 times
    Reversing order granting preliminary injunction prohibiting defendants from removing physician from position where physician held no presdisciplinary procedural protections before he could be removed from administrative posts

  4. Triple a Machine Shop, Inc v. State of California

    213 Cal.App.3d 131 (Cal. Ct. App. 1989)   Cited 46 times
    Reversing preliminary injunction barring prosecutors from contacting certain corporate employees during criminal investigation

  5. Jessen v. Keystone Savings & Loan Assn.

    142 Cal.App.3d 454 (Cal. Ct. App. 1983)   Cited 35 times
    Recognizing the power to enjoin a non-judicial foreclosure sale where the amount of the debt was in dispute, but affirming the lower court's refusal to restrain the sale in question

  6. People ex rel. Gow v. Mitchell Bros.' Santa Ana Theater

    118 Cal.App.3d 863 (Cal. Ct. App. 1981)   Cited 5 times

    Docket No. 23408. April 16, 1981. Appeal from Superior Court of Orange County, No. 315593, Lester Van Tatenhove, Judge. COUNSEL William K. Maas, Jr., and Meredith Bradford for Defendants and Appellants. James J. Clancy for Plaintiff and Respondent. OPINION MORRIS, J. This is the third appeal between these parties to be decided by this court within the last 15 months. In this case, as in the previous two, the Santa Ana City Attorney brought suit, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 731, against