§Why CasetextPricing

DICON FIBEROPTICS v. FRANCHISE TAX BOARD

Respondent's Petition for Review

31 Cited authorities

  1. Blank v. Kirwan

    39 Cal.3d 311 (Cal. 1985)   Cited 3,016 times
    Holding that the standard for a failure to state a claim is whether "the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action"

  2. Yamaha Corp. of America v. State Bd. of Equalization

    19 Cal.4th 1 (Cal. 1998)   Cited 640 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “administrative interpretation ... will be accorded great respect by the courts and will be followed it not clearly erroneous”

  3. Lewis v. Reynolds

    284 U.S. 281 (1932)   Cited 357 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"

  4. Silicon Valley Taxpayers Assn., Inc. v. Santa Clara County Open Space Authority

    44 Cal.4th 431 (Cal. 2008)   Cited 119 times
    Concluding assessment was invalid for failure to meet the requirements of Proposition 218 but not addressing the validity of the assessment district

  5. Mills v. U.S. Bank

    166 Cal.App.4th 871 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 80 times
    Affirming the denial of a motion to compel for failing to comply with former rule 335, now 3.1345

  6. Woosley v. State of California

    3 Cal.4th 758 (Cal. 1992)   Cited 117 times
    In Woosley, supra, 3 Cal.4th 758, 794, 13 Cal.Rptr.2d 30, 838 P.2d 758, we reaffirmed the principle that "[t]he circumstance that our decision overrules prior decisions of the Courts of Appeal does not in itself justify prospective application."

  7. Morris v. Williams

    67 Cal.2d 733 (Cal. 1967)   Cited 222 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"

  8. Microsoft Corp. v. Franchise Tax Bd.

    39 Cal.4th 750 (Cal. 2006)   Cited 64 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that gross receipts were not limited to net proceeds and including the entire amount received when the taxpayer redeemed its securities at maturity, but then applying the relief provision

  9. Lee v. Los Angeles Cty. Metro. Transit Auth

    107 Cal.App.4th 848 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003)   Cited 60 times
    In Lee v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (2003) 107 Cal.App.4th 848, 855 [ 132 Cal.Rptr.2d 444] (Lee), the court and parties agreed that the three-year statute applied to allegations that the plaintiffs property was damaged by the construction of a subway under a neighboring street.

  10. De Anza Santa Cruz Mobile Estates Homeowners Ass'n v. De Anza Santa Cruz Mobile Estates

    94 Cal.App.4th 890 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001)   Cited 60 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In De Anza Santa Cruz Mobile Estates Homeowners Assn. v. De Anza Santa Cruz Mobile Estates, 94 Cal.App.4th 890, 918 (2001), the court considered whether litigation tactics could be considered by a jury in evaluating a punitive damages claim.

  11. Section 8466 - Acceptable Documentation

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 25 § 8466   Cited 1 times

    (a) To demonstrate that an employee is a qualified employee under Subdivision (b)(4)(A)(iv)(I), (b)(4)(A)(iv)(II), or (b)(4)(A)(iv)(XI), the Applicant shall provide one of the following documents pertaining to the employee's status immediately preceding commencement of employment with the Applicant: (1) A document issued by the local CalWORKS administrator stating that the employee was eligible for CalWORKS. (2) A document issued by the local WIA case manager or administrator stating that the employee

  12. Section 8446 - Scope of Article

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 25 § 8446   Cited 1 times

    For the purposes of this article: (a) The regulations contained in this article shall apply to programs established pursuant to chapter 12.8 (commencing with section 7070, Government Code) and to programs established pursuant to Chapter 12.9 (commencing with section 7080, Government Code). (b) "Expansion request" shall mean a written document that proposes to enlarge the geographic area previously designated as an enterprise zone or a program area. (c) "Expansion area" shall mean the geographic area

  13. 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