§Why CasetextPricing

Du vs The City of San Diego

Motion Other

10 Cited authorities

  1. Foreman Clark Corp. v. Fallon

    3 Cal.3d 875 (Cal. 1971)   Cited 1,287 times
    Rejecting claim "evidence should not have been considered since the other leases predated the breach by almost two years[]" because "[t]his merely went to the weight which the trier of fact, in its discretion, gave to the evidence"

  2. Omaha Indemnity Co. v. Superior Court

    209 Cal.App.3d 1266 (Cal. Ct. App. 1989)   Cited 105 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Discussing pervasive use of extraordinary writs of appeal

  3. McLellan v. McLellan

    23 Cal.App.3d 343 (Cal. Ct. App. 1972)   Cited 74 times
    Allowing attorney declaration

  4. Kaiser Steel Corp. v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp.

    55 Cal.App.3d 737 (Cal. Ct. App. 1976)   Cited 64 times
    Holding a steel mill operator could not rely on a strict liability theory in its suit against the manufacturer of a defective motor which destroyed the motor and caused a temporary shut down of the mill

  5. Medo v. Superior Court

    205 Cal.App.3d 64 (Cal. Ct. App. 1988)   Cited 28 times
    Adding that “punitive damages must bear a reasonable relation to the actual damages”

  6. Buran Equipment Co. v. H C Investment Co.

    142 Cal.App.3d 338 (Cal. Ct. App. 1983)   Cited 17 times
    Concluding that by ordering a threshold issue to be tried first, "the trial judge acted in full compliance with the direction of the Legislature to promote economy and efficiency in the handling of litigation" because if plaintiff could not prove the issue, trial would be markedly shorter

  7. Horton v. Jones

    26 Cal.App.3d 952 (Cal. Ct. App. 1972)   Cited 23 times
    In Horton v. Jones (1972) 26 Cal.App.3d 952, the court of appeal ruled that an appeal could not be taken from a denial of a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict after the liability phase of a bifurcated trial, before the damages phase had begun.

  8. County of Kern v. Superior Court

    82 Cal.App.3d 396 (Cal. Ct. App. 1978)   Cited 10 times

    Docket No. 3995. June 29, 1978. COUNSEL Borton, Petrini Conron and George F. Martin for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. Sims Solomon, Gabriel W. Solomon and Michael S. Konnoff for Real Party in Interest. OPINION HOPPER, J. Petitioner seeks a writ of mandate compelling respondent court to grant a motion under Code of Civil Procedure sections 597.5 and 597 to have certain affirmative defenses in a medical malpractice action heard first, and to set aside a discovery order and an order overruling

  9. Trickey v. Superior Court

    252 Cal.App.2d 650 (Cal. Ct. App. 1967)   Cited 8 times

    Docket No. 11573. July 17, 1967. PROCEEDING in mandamus to compel the Superior Court of Sacramento County to hear and pass on a motion for a bifurcated trial at which the issue of liability would be heard and decided before trial of the damage question in a personal injury action. Writ granted. Mento, Buchler Littlefield and Theodore H. Morrison for Petitioners. No appearance for Respondent. Colley McGhee and Milton L. McGhee for Real Party in Interest. FRIEDMAN, J. This mandate proceeding is the

  10. Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 5   Cited 22,753 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system