10 Cited authorities

  1. Quelimane Co. v. Stewart Title Guaranty Co.

    19 Cal.4th 26 (Cal. 1998)   Cited 772 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that title insurer owed no duty of ordinary care to non-clients, commenting that "[i]n the business arena it would be unprecedented to impose a duty on one actor to operate its business in a manner that would ensure the financial success of transactions between third parties"
  2. Huntingdon Life Sciences, Inc. v. Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty USA, Inc.

    129 Cal.App.4th 1228 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 310 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Concluding one plaintiff lacked standing to pursue certain claims
  3. Kidron v. Movie Acquisition Corp.

    40 Cal.App.4th 1571 (Cal. Ct. App. 1995)   Cited 299 times
    Finding that service of the complaint gave the defendant notice of a claim for fraud, not actual knowledge of the fraud itself
  4. Trerice v. Blue Cross of California

    209 Cal.App.3d 878 (Cal. Ct. App. 1989)   Cited 148 times
    Holding that replacing plaintiff's termination package with one less favorable and requiring her to perform menial tasks did not support an IIED claim
  5. Asahi Kasei Pharma Corp. v. Actelion Ltd.

    222 Cal.App.4th 945 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 36 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding substantial evidence supporting a lost profits calculation where the business "does not fit neatly into the established business versus new business paradigm"
  6. Estate of Sanders

    40 Cal.3d 607 (Cal. 1985)   Cited 80 times

    Docket No. L.A. 32054. December 23, 1985. Appeal from Superior Court of San Diego County, No. P 131314, Alpha L. Montgomery, Sr., Judge. COUNSEL Richard J. Scuba for Petitioners and Appellants. Thomas A. Henry, Jr., for Objector and Respondent. OPINION BROUSSARD, J. Appellants, Sara Sanders and her sons Darren and David, appeal from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County denying their motion to set aside the court's previous orders admitting the will of Mary Sanders to probate and ordering

  7. Flintco Pacific, Inc. v. TEC Management Consultants, Inc.

    1 Cal.App.5th 727 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016)   Cited 20 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Explaining whether a general contractor is entitled to rely upon a proposed subcontractor bid must be decided on the basis of the facts of the particular case before the court
  8. Estate of Morcel

    162 Cal. 188 (Cal. 1912)   Cited 42 times

    S.F. No. 5788. February 5, 1912. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Alameda County refusing to admit an alleged will to probate and from an order refusing a new trial. F.B. Ogden, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. E.K. Taylor, for Appellant. R.B. Tappan, for Respondent. ANGELLOTTI, J. This is an appeal from a judgment refusing to admit to probate a paper offered as the last will of deceased, and from an order denying the proponent's motion for a new trial. The

  9. Estate of Muller

    14 Cal.App.2d 129 (Cal. Ct. App. 1936)   Cited 6 times

    Docket No. 10079. May 18, 1936. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Arthur Keetch, Judge. Reversed. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. S.S. Hahn and W.O. Graf for Appellants. Hugh E. Macbeth and Raphael Dechter for Respondents. GOULD, J., pro tem. When the purser of a coastwise passenger vessel checked off his "berthing sheet" upon arrival at Wilmington, California, April 3, 1933, two passengers, "Mr. and Mrs. Smardon", did not disembark. Search of their

  10. Section 430.10 - Grounds for objection by party against whom complaint or cross-complaint filed

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 430.10   Cited 1,056 times
    Explaining "[t]he party against whom a complaint ... has been filed may object, by demurrer ..., to the pleading" on the basis that "[t]he pleading does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action"