§Why CasetextPricing

CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY v. DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE (NEWHALL LAND AND FARMING COMPANY)

Appellant’s Request for Judicial Notice

8 Cited authorities

  1. Associated Bldrs. Contrs. v. S.F. Airports Commn

    21 Cal.4th 352 (Cal. 1999)   Cited 279 times
    Finding that the requirement that a party be "beneficially interested" is equivalent to the federal "injury in fact" test

  2. Pacific Lumber Co. v. State Water Res. Control Bd.

    37 Cal.4th 921 (Cal. 2006)   Cited 162 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Concluding State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection and State Water Resources Control Board have concurrent jurisdiction over timber harvesting activities which affect water resources

  3. Casella v. Southwest Dealer Services, Inc.

    157 Cal.App.4th 1127 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 103 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding narrow provision limiting fees to those "'incurred in enforcing or attempting to enforce'" employment agreement did not permit recovery of fees former employee incurred in prosecuting wrongful discharge tort claim against employer

  4. In re Sodersten

    146 Cal.App.4th 1163 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 88 times
    Holding court has discretion to apply exception to mootness rule when habeas petitioner dies during pendency of proceeding

  5. Carleton v. Tortosa

    14 Cal.App.4th 745 (Cal. Ct. App. 1993)   Cited 43 times
    Finding that plaintiff's claim of duty negated by specific documents limiting scope of duty of real estate broker

  6. Shaw v. People ex Rel. Chiang

    175 Cal.App.4th 577 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 19 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Shaw v. People ex rel. Chiang (2009) 175 Cal.App.4th 577, where the court took judicial notice of information on the state Department of Transportation website describing the department's structure and defining "mass transportation," none of the parties disputed the accuracy of the information.

  7. California State Employees' Assn. v. Flournoy

    32 Cal.App.3d 219 (Cal. Ct. App. 1973)   Cited 42 times
    Taking judicial notice certain of the Regents' Standing Orders, sections of a University administrative manual, and a University personnel rule

  8. Harris v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Bd.

    62 Cal.2d 589 (Cal. 1965)   Cited 49 times

    Docket No. S.F. 21919. April 15, 1965. APPEAL from a decision of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. Byron Arnold, Judge. Affirmed. Stanley Mosk and Thomas C. Lynch, Attorneys General, and Wiley W. Manuel, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Appellant. Charles P. Just, Joseph L. Alioto, Saveri Saveri and Richard Saveri for Defendants and Respondents. BURKE, J. This is an appeal by the Director of the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (the Department) from a judgment