§Why CasetextPricing

Denys H. Oberman vs. Shirish Jagmohandas Shah

Motion Other

10 Cited authorities

  1. US Ecology, Inc. v. State

    129 Cal.App.4th 887 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 304 times
    Holding that causation is an element of a promissory estoppel claim

  2. Garcia v. World Savings, FSB

    183 Cal.App.4th 1031 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 171 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an "oral promise to postpone a foreclosure sale or to allow a borrower to delay monthly mortgage payments is unenforceable"

  3. Youngman v. Nevada Irr. Dist.

    70 Cal.2d 240 (Cal. 1969)   Cited 224 times
    Noting that the doctrine of promissory estoppel is meant to make a promise binding, under certain circumstances, even in the absence of consideration, and that therefore the doctrine is inapplicable where a promise is supported by consideration

  4. Roth v. Parker

    57 Cal.App.4th 542 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 91 times
    Rejecting appeal of nonstatutory due process bias claim for failing to seek writ review and raising the issue in the trial court, and for only raising the issue in the reply brief on appeal

  5. Nemarnik v. Los Angeles Kings Hockey Club

    103 Cal.App.4th 631 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 21 times

    B150794 Filed October 9, 2002 Certified for Partial Publication November 8, 2002 IT IS ORDERED that the opinion is now certified for publication with exception of the part designated as "AWARD OF COSTS" beginning on pages 13 through 17. Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. BC 226937, Lois Anderson Smaltz, Judge. Affirmed. Law Offices of Martina A. Silas and Martina A. Silas for Plaintiff and Appellant. Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman Dicker, Patrick M. Kelly,

  6. South Shore Land Co. v. Petersen

    226 Cal.App.2d 725 (Cal. Ct. App. 1964)   Cited 66 times
    In SouthShore, the parties had presented competing chains of title to establish their individual claims of right to the property at issue.

  7. Natl. Farm Workers Service Center v. M. Caratan

    146 Cal.App.3d 796 (Cal. Ct. App. 1983)   Cited 29 times
    Finding waiver of a right to arbitrate by a party that failed to invoke it in a timely manner after its opponent filed its complaint

  8. Murphy v. Crowley

    140 Cal. 141 (Cal. 1903)   Cited 65 times
    Holding that "although the main ground of the action is fraud or mistake whereby the defendant has obtained the legal title to the land in controversy, and the chief contention between the parties is with respect to the fraud or mistake alleged . . . the action is in reality for the recovery of real property, and is not barred except by the [period of] limitation" applicable to real property actions

  9. Bullard v. Kempff

    119 Cal. 9 (Cal. 1897)   Cited 7 times

    Department Two APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco dissolving a preliminary injunction. A. A. Sanderson, Judge. COUNSEL: Dunne & McPike, for Appellants. Olney & Olney, for Respondent. JUDGES: Haynes, C. Belcher, C., and Searls, C., concurred. McFarland, J., Temple, J., Henshaw, J. OPINION HAYNES, Judge Plaintiff brought this action to enjoin the defendants from destroying or removing a bulkhead or retaining wall erected along the westerly side of her

  10. Garrison v. Sampson

    15 Cal. 93 (Cal. 1860)   Cited 8 times

    Appeal from the Fifteenth District. Complaint averred that plaintiff was " the owner and entitled to the possession of" the premises, " containing some one hundred and sixty acres or thereabouts; " and that defendant " wrongfully and unlawfully entered upon, took possession of, and ousted" plaintiff, and still " wrongfully and unlawfully withholds the possession," etc. Defendant appeals. Judgment reversed, and cause remanded. COUNSEL 1. The complaint should set out the facts: mere general averments