§Why CasetextPricing

Vincent Jue vs. Maggie Jia Liu

Motion for Summary Judgment/Adjudication

10 Cited authorities

  1. Engalla v. Permanente Med. Grp., Inc.

    15 Cal.4th 951 (Cal. 1997)   Cited 1,226 times
    Holding that a party's "course of delay" in performing the terms of the contract, when "unreasonable or undertaken in bad faith, may provide sufficient grounds" for a finding of waiver

  2. FPI Development, Inc. v. Nakashima

    231 Cal.App.3d 367 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991)   Cited 289 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Affirming summary judgment

  3. Zavala v. Arce

    58 Cal.App.4th 915 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 146 times

    Docket No. D023269. October 27, 1997. Appeal from Superior Court of San Diego County, No. SB2433, Thomas Oliver LaVoy, Judge. COUNSEL Suppa, Highnote Lee and Teresa Trucchi for Plaintiff and Appellant. Lewis, D'Amato, Brisbois Bisgaard, Marilyn R. Moriarty, James E. Friedhofer and Thomas M. Diachenko for Defendant and Respondent. OPINION NARES, J. Plaintiff Diana Zavala appeals from a summary judgment in favor of defendant Jorge Arce, M.D. (Dr. Arce), her former obstetrician, on her first amended

  4. Hunter v. Pacific Mechanical Corp.

    37 Cal.App.4th 1282 (Cal. Ct. App. 1995)   Cited 42 times
    Following Union Bank

  5. State Farm Mut. Auto. v. Dept. of Motor Vehicles

    53 Cal.App.4th 1076 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 30 times
    In State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co. v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1997) 53 Cal.App.4th 1076, the court held that these Vehicle Code section 1808.22 exceptions to the privacy provisions of the Vehicle Code are broad enough to allow an attorney to obtain such information when investigating a potential claim for conversion of a vehicle.

  6. Mains v. City Title Insurance Co.

    34 Cal.2d 580 (Cal. 1949)   Cited 38 times
    In Mains v. City Title Ins. Co., 34 Cal.2d 580 [ 212 P.2d 873], the court held that under present law a sale by an administrator is not a judicial sale; that it is a private sale; that the rule of caveat emptor does not apply to such a sale, and that implied warranties of title do apply to such sales.

  7. Trigg v. Arnott

    22 Cal.App.2d 455 (Cal. Ct. App. 1937)   Cited 25 times
    Holding that the holder of the note must act in a manner that effectively provides notice that the holder has exercised his option

  8. Rotea v. Izuel

    14 Cal.2d 605 (Cal. 1939)   Cited 19 times
    In Rotea v. Izuel, supra, 14 Cal.2d 605, 610-611, it was held that an obligation will not be implied in law "where the direct benefit is received by a third party and the only benefit received by the defendant is the incidental benefit which he may find in the satisfaction of obtaining compliance with his request.

  9. McArthur v. Johnson

    216 Cal. 580 (Cal. 1932)   Cited 11 times

    Docket No. L.A. 13154. October 25, 1932. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Imperial County. Vaughan N. Thompson, Judge. Affirmed in part and reversed in part. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. S.P. Williams and C.L. Brown for Appellant. Harry W. Horton for Respondent. PRESTON, J. Upon re-examination of this cause, we desire to adopt as a part of the opinion of this court herein practically the entire opinion written by Mr. Justice pro tem. Harden of the District Court

  10. Section 3439 - Title of act

    Cal. Civ. Code § 3439   Cited 560 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Setting forth factors upon which actual fraudulent intent may be found