§Why CasetextPricing

Jena Peoples vs. Mcafee, Inc.

Motion for Leave to File Cross-Complaint

13 Cited authorities

  1. American Motorcycle Assn. v. Superior Court

    20 Cal.3d 578 (Cal. 1978)   Cited 469 times
    Adopting a comparative indemnity theory

  2. Paragon Real Estate Group of San Francisco, Inc. v. Hansen

    178 Cal.App.4th 177 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 12 times

    No. A121567. October 7, 2009. Appeal from the Superior Court of Alameda County, No. RG05243941, Lawrence John Appel, Judge. Parker Crosland, David M. Parker and C. Royda Crosland for Cross-complainants and Appellants. Livingston Mix, Mary E. Mix, Dennis L. Livingston for Cross-defendants and Respondents. OPINION RUVOLO, P.J. I. INTRODUCTION Over 30 years ago, our Supreme Court announced that where joint tortfeasors are liable for a plaintiffs injuries, they are entitled to have their liability apportioned

  3. City of Hanford v. Superior Court

    208 Cal.App.3d 580 (Cal. Ct. App. 1989)   Cited 25 times
    Treating a subsequent proceeding — a purported cross-complaint — as a new action because, among other things, it did not challenge an order or judgment made in the original proceeding

  4. Time for Living, Inc. v. Guy Hatfield Homes/All American Development Co.

    230 Cal.App.3d 30 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991)   Cited 7 times

    Docket Nos. D012030, D012031, D012142. May 10, 1991. Appeal from Superior Court of San Diego County, Nos. 576344, 552433 and 574289, Jeffrey T. Miller and James R. Milliken, Judges. COUNSEL Edwards, White Sooy and Robert von Zirngibl for Cross-complainants and Appellants. Lorber, Grady, Farley Volk, William P. Volk and Daniel W. Kelsberg for Cross-defendant and Respondent. OPINION FROEHLICH, J. We here review summary judgments granted in favor of a cross-defendant sued in indemnity. The defendants

  5. Nomellini Construction Co. v. Harris

    272 Cal.App.2d 352 (Cal. Ct. App. 1969)   Cited 8 times
    In Nomellini Constr. Co. v. Harris, 272 Cal.App.2d 352 [ 77 Cal.Rptr. 361], Nomellini Construction filed an action against Paul O. Harris, a subcontractor, for failure to perform a construction contract. Harris cross-complained against Hurricane Steel Industries, Inc., alleging that his failure to perform was caused by Hurricane's breach of contract to supply him material.

  6. Section 51 - [Effective 1/1/2025] Unruh Civil Rights Act

    Cal. Civ. Code § 51   Cited 5,368 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Incorporating ADA violations

  7. Section 12900 - Short title

    Cal. Gov. Code § 12900   Cited 2,348 times   11 Legal Analyses

    This part may be known and referred to as the "California Fair Employment and Housing Act." Ca. Gov. Code § 12900 Amended by Stats 2022 ch 48 (SB 189),s 29, eff. 6/30/2022(amended Part heading). Added by Stats. 1980, Ch. 992.

  8. Section 52 - Liability for discrimination or denial of right

    Cal. Civ. Code § 52   Cited 1,450 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that violators of the Act are liable to "any person denied the rights" guaranteed by the Act

  9. Section 1102.5 - Whistleblower protection

    Cal. Lab. Code § 1102.5   Cited 1,317 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Making it unlawful for an employer to impose any policy which "prevent an employee from disclosing information to a government or law enforcement agency ... or to another employee who has authority to investigate, discover, or correct the violation or noncompliance"

  10. Section 51.5 - Business discrimination

    Cal. Civ. Code § 51.5   Cited 210 times
    Prohibiting discrimination against person "associated with" person who is, or is perceived to be, disabled

  11. Section 51.9 - Sexual harassment

    Cal. Civ. Code § 51.9   Cited 152 times   9 Legal Analyses

    (a) A person is liable in a cause of action for sexual harassment under this section when the plaintiff proves all of the following elements: (1) There is a business, service, or professional relationship between the plaintiff and defendant or the defendant holds himself or herself out as being able to help the plaintiff establish a business, service, or professional relationship with the defendant or a third party. Such a relationship may exist between a plaintiff and a person, including, but not

  12. Section 428.10 - Generally

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 428.10   Cited 94 times

    A party against whom a cause of action has been asserted in a complaint or cross-complaint may file a cross-complaint setting forth either or both of the following: (a) Any cause of action he has against any of the parties who filed the complaint or cross-complaint against him. Nothing in this subdivision authorizes the filing of a cross-complaint against the plaintiff in an action commenced under Title 7 (commencing with Section 1230.010) of Part 3. (b) Any cause of action he has against a person

  13. Section 428.50 - Time for filing

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 428.50   Cited 44 times

    (a) A party shall file a cross-complaint against any of the parties who filed the complaint or cross-complaint against him or her before or at the same time as the answer to the complaint or cross-complaint. (b) Any other cross-complaint may be filed at any time before the court has set a date for trial. (c) A party shall obtain leave of court to file any cross-complaint except one filed within the time specified in subdivision (a) or (b). Leave may be granted in the interest of justice at any time