29 Cited authorities

  1. In re Rosenkrantz

    29 Cal.4th 616 (Cal. 2002)   Cited 766 times
    Holding that Governor's reversal of parole grant is subject to state judicial review
  2. Hess v. Ford Motor Company

    27 Cal.4th 516 (Cal. 2002)   Cited 193 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the doctrine of mistake cannot be used to create a new contract between the parties
  3. Johnson v. Manhattan Ry. Co.

    289 U.S. 479 (1933)   Cited 464 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an assigned judge need not abide by an "invalid" rule purporting to interfere "with the discharge" of assigned judicial duties
  4. California Medical Association v. Aetna U.S.

    94 Cal.App.4th 151 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001)   Cited 119 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "as a matter of law, a quasi-contract action for unjust enrichment does not lie where, as here, express binding agreements exist and define the parties' rights"
  5. Pereira v. County of Santa Clara

    113 Cal.App.4th 549 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003)   Cited 105 times
    Holding that a principal cannot be held liable for an actual agent who acts beyond the scope of his actual or ostensible authority
  6. Prouty v. Gores Technology Group

    121 Cal.App.4th 1225 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 87 times
    Finding that where two companies included a specific provision granting rights to one company's employees that “expressly benefit[ted] them, and only them,” this specific provision was an exception to the contract's general no-third-party beneficiaries provision
  7. Morohoshi v. Pacific Home

    34 Cal.4th 482 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 83 times
    Finding that although regional centers possessed many statutory and non-delegable duties to coordinate, monitor, implement and secure (though not provide) treatment services for the developmentally disabled by contracting with care facilities, the regional center's “monitoring responsibilities” were limited and did not require “the hour-by-hour monitoring that would have been required to prevent [the decedent's] tragic death.” The court noted that regional centers “could not possibly provide [such] continuous monitoring” and that the state legislature did not contemplate such a duty.
  8. Phelps v. Stostad

    16 Cal.4th 23 (Cal. 1997)   Cited 71 times
    Referring to compensation for any non-economic injuries
  9. Johnson v. Superior Court of Los Angeles Co.

    80 Cal.App.4th 1050 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000)   Cited 61 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a physician-patient privilege did not exist where a sperm donor visited sperm bank in order only to sell his sperm and not for diagnosis or treatment of any physical or mental ailment
  10. Expedia v. City of Columbus

    681 S.E.2d 122 (Ga. 2009)   Cited 36 times
    Holding that tax collection obligations imposed on Expedia were constitutional because it had agreed to make the collections pursuant to contracts with the hotels
  11. Section 1559

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1559   Cited 366 times
    Permitting a third person to enforce a contract if it was "made expressly for the benefit of a third person"
  12. Section 404

    Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 404   Cited 63 times   5 Legal Analyses

    When civil actions sharing a common question of fact or law are pending in different courts, a petition for coordination may be submitted to the Chairperson of the Judicial Council, by the presiding judge of any such court, or by any party to one of the actions after obtaining permission from the presiding judge, or by all of the parties plaintiff or defendant in any such action. A petition for coordination, or a motion for permission to submit a petition, shall be supported by a declaration stating

  13. Rule 8.1115 - Citation of opinions

    Cal. R. 8.1115   Cited 5,527 times

    (a) Unpublished opinion Except as provided in (b), an opinion of a California Court of Appeal or superior court appellate division that is not certified for publication or ordered published must not be cited or relied on by a court or a party in any other action. (b)Exceptions An unpublished opinion may be cited or relied on: (1) When the opinion is relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel; or (2) When the opinion is relevant to a criminal or disciplinary

  14. Rule 8.204 - Contents and format of briefs

    Cal. R. 8.204   Cited 2,592 times

    (a) Contents (1) Each brief must: (A) Begin with a table of contents and a table of authorities separately listing cases, constitutions, statutes, court rules, and other authorities cited; (B) State each point under a separate heading or subheading summarizing the point, and support each point by argument and, if possible, by citation of authority; and (C) Support any reference to a matter in the record by a citation to the volume and page number of the record where the matter appears. If any part

  15. Rule 8.46 - Sealed records

    Cal. R. 8.46   Cited 35 times

    (a)Application This rule applies to sealed records and records proposed to be sealed on appeal and in original proceedings, but does not apply to confidential records. (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2014; previously amended effective January 1, 2006, and January 1, 2007.) (b)Record sealed by the trial court If a record sealed by order of the trial court is part of the record on appeal or the supporting documents or other records accompanying a motion, petition for a writ of habeas corpus

  16. Rule 3.350 - Consolidation of cases

    Cal. R. 3.350   Cited 7 times

    (a) Requirements of motion (1) A notice of motion to consolidate must: (A) List all named parties in each case, the names of those who have appeared, and the names of their respective attorneys of record; (B) Contain the captions of all the cases sought to be consolidated, with the lowest numbered case shown first ; and (C) Be filed in each case sought to be consolidated. (2) The motion to consolidate: (A) Is deemed a single motion for the purpose of determining the appropriate filing fee, but memorandums

  17. Rule 3.541 - Duties of the coordination trial judge

    Cal. R. 3.541   Cited 4 times

    (a) Initial case management conference The coordination trial judge must hold a case management conference within 45 days after issuance of the assignment order. Counsel and all self-represented persons must attend the conference and be prepared to discuss all matters specified in the order setting the conference. At any time following the assignment of the coordination trial judge, a party may serve and submit a proposed agenda for the conference and a proposed form of order covering such matters

  18. Rule 3.501 - Definitions

    Cal. R. 3.501   Cited 2 times

    As used in this chapter, unless the context or subject matter otherwise requires: (1) "Action" means any civil action or proceeding that is subject to coordination or that affects an action subject to coordination. (2) "Add-on case" means an action that is proposed for coordination, under Code of Civil Procedure section 404.4, with actions previously ordered coordinated. (3) "Assigned judge" means any judge assigned by the Chair of the Judicial Council or by a presiding judge authorized by the Chair