8 Cited authorities

Shirk v. Vista Unified School Dist.
42 Cal.4th 201 (Cal. 2007) Cited 661 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[b]efore suing a public entity, the plaintiff must present a timely written claim for damages to the entity"
Cortez v. Purolator Air Filtration Products Co.
23 Cal.4th 163 (Cal. 2000) Cited 555 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding restitution is "the return of the excess of what the plaintiff gave the defendant over the value of what the plaintiff received"
People v. Hudson
38 Cal.4th 1002 (Cal. 2006) Cited 429 times
Holding that “for purposes of section 2800.1, a pursuing peace officer's vehicle is ‘distinctively marked’ if its outward appearance during the pursuit exhibits, in addition to a red light and a siren, one or more features that are reasonably visible to other drivers and distinguish it from vehicles not used for law enforcement so as to give reasonable notice to the fleeing motorist that the pursuit is by the police”
People v. Otto
26 Cal.4th 200 (Cal. 2001) Cited 286 times
In Otto, the California Supreme Court concluded that the SVP Act procedures, including its statutory hearsay exception, did not violate a defendant's right to due process.
People v. Garcia
28 Cal.4th 1166 (Cal. 2002) Cited 183 times
Upholding imposition of a subdivision (d) 25-year enhancement on a defendant who was not the actual shooter
Lopez v. Superior Court
50 Cal.4th 1055 (Cal. 2010) Cited 96 times
Holding that petitioner "could not properly challenge whether he committed an enumerated offense justifying his initial MDO commitment," which was a static criterion, after first year of that commitment
Quintano v. Mercury Casualty Co.
11 Cal.4th 1049 (Cal. 1995) Cited 124 times 1 Legal Analyses
Noting that under Macri, § 11580.2(p) establishes a precondition to the accrual of the insured's right to coverage
County of Colusa v. California Wildlife Conservation Bd.
145 Cal.App.4th 637 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006) Cited 49 times
Finding of significant benefit supported by fact that project was first of its kind and litigation provided first test of agencys legal position

PEOPLE v. STEVENS

8 Cited authorities

Holding that "[b]efore suing a public entity, the plaintiff must present a timely written claim for damages to the entity"

Holding restitution is "the return of the excess of what the plaintiff gave the defendant over the value of what the plaintiff received"

In Otto, the California Supreme Court concluded that the SVP Act procedures, including its statutory hearsay exception, did not violate a defendant's right to due process.

Upholding imposition of a subdivision (d) 25-year enhancement on a defendant who was not the actual shooter

Holding that petitioner "could not properly challenge whether he committed an enumerated offense justifying his initial MDO commitment," which was a static criterion, after first year of that commitment

Noting that under Macri, § 11580.2(p) establishes a precondition to the accrual of the insured's right to coverage

Finding of significant benefit supported by fact that project was first of its kind and litigation provided first test of agencys legal position