25 Cited authorities

  1. Cel-Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co.

    20 Cal.4th 163 (Cal. 1999)   Cited 2,433 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Holding that for an act to be "unfair," it must "threaten" a violation of law or "violate the policy or spirit of one of those laws because its effects are comparable to or the same as a violation of the law"
  2. Aubry v. Tri-City Hospital Dist.

    2 Cal.4th 962 (Cal. 1992)   Cited 1,186 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Aubry, supra, 42 Cal.App.4th 579 at pages 587 through 588, 49 Cal.Rptr.2d 703, the court, citing language from Labor Council, held the Regents were not required to pay private contractors the prevailing wage under section 1770 et seq., which applies to public works, for the construction of student and staff housing.
  3. Eastburn v. Regional Fire Protection Auth.

    31 Cal.4th 1175 (Cal. 2003)   Cited 222 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "direct tort liability of public entities must be based on a specific statute declaring them to be liable, or at least creating some specific duty of care" other than the general duty of ordinary care found in California Civil Code § 1714
  4. Davis v. Ford Motor Credit Co. LLC

    179 Cal.App.4th 581 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 137 times
    Discussing the three tests employed by California courts
  5. Flannery v. California Highway Patrol

    61 Cal.App.4th 629 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 182 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that federal law rejecting the use of multipliers in calculating fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 does not control fee awards under the FEHA because there is no evidence that the California legislature "intended or intends federal standards to apply to limit the trial court's exercise of discretion in calculating the amount of reasonable attorney fees under California fee-shifting statutes generally or under the FEHA provision in particular"
  6. Madrid v. Perot Systems Corp.

    130 Cal.App.4th 440 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 131 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiff did not have vested interest in money that defendant received through alleged sale of confidential information to third parties or in "ill-gotten gain" that defendant energy producers and suppliers received through their alleged overcharges, where plaintiff did not seek to recover actual overcharges paid by class members
  7. Kizer v. County of San Mateo

    53 Cal.3d 139 (Cal. 1991)   Cited 97 times
    In Kizer, the State Department of Health Services issued class AA and A citations under section 1424 to a long-term health care facility that was licensed and operated by the County of San Mateo ("County").
  8. Osseous Technologies of America, Inc. v. DiscoveryOrtho Partners LLC

    191 Cal.App.4th 357 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 49 times
    In Osseous Technologies of America, Inc. v. DiscoveryOrtho Partners LLC (2010) 191 Cal.App.4th 357, 365, a panel of this court explained a conceptual framework classifying declaratory relief into three types for the purpose of determining whether the trial court erred by dismissing a declaratory relief cause of action.
  9. Satrap v. Pacific Gas Electric Co.

    42 Cal.App.4th 72 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996)   Cited 50 times
    Holding the plaintiff's personal financial stake was not so disproportionate to the cost of litigation that the lawsuit would not have been brought without the additional incentive of an award of attorney fees
  10. PH II, Inc. v. Superior Court

    33 Cal.App.4th 1680 (Cal. Ct. App. 1995)   Cited 43 times
    Holding that a trial court may not sustain a demurrer to only part of a cause of action
  11. Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 5   Cited 22,233 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system