Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co.
25 Cal.4th 826 (Cal. 2001) Cited 4,974 times 2 Legal AnalysesConcluding that the gathering and dissemination of pricing information by the petroleum companies through an independent industry service did not imply collusive action where there was no evidence the information was misused as a basis for an unlawful conspiracy; rather, evidence suggested that individual companies used all available resources “to determine capacity, supply, and pricing decisions which would maximize their own individual profits”
People v. Sanchez
63 Cal.4th 665 (Cal. 2016) Cited 1,504 timesHolding that case-specific out-of-court statements offered by an expert and not otherwise admissible are necessarily offered for their truth, in violation of the Confrontation Clause
People v. Gardeley
14 Cal.4th 605 (Cal. 1996) Cited 2,120 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding it proper for prosecutor to give gang expert "a `hypothetical based on the facts of the assault in this case on Edward Bruno by three Family Crip members, ask[ing] [gang expert] if in his expert opinion an attack as described would be "gang-related activity"
People v. Xue Vang
52 Cal.4th 1038 (Cal. 2011) Cited 794 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding that the trial court did not err in permitting an expert witness to testify in the form of hypotheticals that closely tracked the evidence
People v. McWhorter
47 Cal.4th 318 (Cal. 2009) Cited 486 timesHolding that trial court properly examined totality of circumstances by viewing recording of police interview in its entirety, not "in snippets or parts"
Piscitelli v. Friedenberg
87 Cal.App.4th 953 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001) Cited 218 timesHolding that admission of expert testimony on “the ultimate result of the underlying arbitration” constituted a “clear abuse of discretion” since it was “precisely the jury's role to step into the shoes of the arbitrators, consider the facts of [the plaintiff's] underlying claims and ultimately determine their merits”
Leslie G. v. Perry Associates
43 Cal.App.4th 472 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996) Cited 216 times 2 Legal AnalysesHolding "there simply is no evidence from which to infer" an essential element of the plaintiff's cause of action and affirming summary judgment for the defendants
Roberts v. Los Angeles County Bar Assn.
105 Cal.App.4th 604 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003) Cited 161 timesDeciding prong-two issue despite trial court's failure to reach it
Hyatt v. Sierra Boat Co.
79 Cal.App.3d 325 (Cal. Ct. App. 1978) Cited 132 timesIn Hyatt v. Sierra Boat Co. (1978) 79 Cal.App.3d 325 (Hyatt), the plaintiff was driving in the right lane on a highway late at night when his vehicle apparently struck a glancing blow against the defendant's boat trailer, which was parked alongside the highway, then skidded or rolled into a telephone pole.
Thompson v. Halvonik
36 Cal.App.4th 657 (Cal. Ct. App. 1995) Cited 74 timesProving a hypothetical settlement can be difficult because of the many variables that affect settlements