39 Cited authorities

  1. United States v. Janis

    428 U.S. 433 (1976)   Cited 1,047 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding the exclusionary rule inapplicable to civil tax proceedings
  2. People v. Murphy

    25 Cal.4th 136 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 243 times
    Holding that the Three Strikes sentencing scheme applied in addition to other sentencing enhancements because the phrase "notwithstanding any other law" was unambiguous
  3. Kavanaugh v. West Sonoma County Union High School

    29 Cal.4th 911 (Cal. 2003)   Cited 211 times
    In Kavanaugh v. West Sonoma County Union High School Dist. (2003) 29 Cal.4th 911, 919 [ 129 Cal.Rptr.2d 811, 62 P.3d 54], it held that a provision in that code must be interpreted "`"with reference to the whole system of law of which it is a part so that all may be harmonized and have effect.
  4. DaFonte v. Up-Right, Inc.

    2 Cal.4th 593 (Cal. 1992)   Cited 266 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In DaFonte v. Up-Right, Inc., 2 Cal.4th 593, 7 Cal.Rptr.2d 238, 828 P.2d 140 (1992), the California Supreme Court reviewed a statute which provided that each defendant shall be liable only for the percentage of noneconomic damages which corresponded to that defendant's proportionate share of fault.
  5. Lewis v. Reynolds

    284 U.S. 281 (1932)   Cited 349 times
    Holding that the government may "retain payments already received when they do not exceed the amount which might have been properly assessed and demanded"
  6. Flannery v. Prentice

    26 Cal.4th 572 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 135 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Affirming award of attorneys' fees and costs of $891,042
  7. Woods v. Young

    53 Cal.3d 315 (Cal. 1991)   Cited 177 times
    Reiterating that specific provision relating to a particular subject will govern a general provision
  8. Silicon Valley v. Santa Clara County

    44 Cal.4th 431 (Cal. 2008)   Cited 85 times
    In Silicon Valley, the Supreme Court acknowledged that in some cases, the provision of special benefits to the assessed properties may consequently provide incidental general benefits to the public, but to compensate, proportionality controls are imposed on the amounts assessed.
  9. Lennane v. Franchise Tax Bd.

    9 Cal.4th 263 (Cal. 1994)   Cited 109 times
    Investigating a statute's "enactment history"
  10. Morris v. Williams

    67 Cal.2d 733 (Cal. 1967)   Cited 201 times
    Holding that "[a]lthough a plaintiff ordinarily has the burden of proving every allegation of the complaint, . . . [w]here the evidence necessary to establish a fact essential to a claim lies peculiarly within the knowledge and competence of one of the parties, that party has the burden of going forward with the evidence"
  11. Section 41 - Credit for increasing research activities

    26 U.S.C. § 41   Cited 187 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Referring to 26 U.S.C. § 41(d)
  12. Section 8463 - Administration of a Vouchering Program

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 25 § 8463   Cited 1 times

    (a) Each enterprise zone shall have and maintain a vouchering plan containing policies and procedures for the operation of a vouchering program. The plan shall meet the following criteria: (1) The plan shall have written vouchering policies and procedures that ensure compliance with Revenue and Taxation Code Sections 17053.74 and 23622.7, Government Code Section 7070 et seq., California Code of Regulations title 10, chapter 7.8 commencing with Section 5600, and this subchapter 21. (2) The plan shall