12 Cited authorities

  1. Day v. City of Fontana

    25 Cal.4th 268 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 293 times
    Adopting construction of statute that “promotes, rather than defeats, its general purpose”
  2. California Teachers Assn. v. San Diego Community College Dist.

    28 Cal.3d 692 (Cal. 1981)   Cited 474 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In California Teachers Assn. v. San Diego Community College Dist. (1981) 28 Cal.3d 692, our Supreme Court construed identical language in section 45025's predecessor, former section 13503.1.
  3. Commodore Home Systems, Inc. v. Superior Court

    32 Cal.3d 211 (Cal. 1982)   Cited 194 times
    Holding that in a civil action under FEHA, all relief generally available in noncontractual actions, including punitive damages, may be obtained
  4. Martin v. Szeto

    32 Cal.4th 445 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 49 times

    No. S103417 February 19, 2004 Appeal from the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, No. 999134, A. James Robertson II, Judge. Law Offices of Mattaniah Eytan, Mattaniah Eytan, Eric Schenk and Andrea R. Widburg for Defendants and Appellants. Craig K. Martin, in pro. per.; and Melissa L. Foster for Plaintiff and Respondent. WERDEGAR, J. We granted review to resolve a conflict in the lower courts over the proper interpretation of Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.7. The section permits

  5. Frio v. Superior Court

    203 Cal.App.3d 1480 (Cal. Ct. App. 1988)   Cited 66 times
    Holding that record producer could testify about conversations he took part in even though they were illegally recorded
  6. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC

    219 Cal.App.4th 98 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 12 times   20 Legal Analyses
    In Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Brookfield Crystal Cove LLC (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 98 (Liberty Mutual), Hart purchased a new home built by Brookfield.
  7. McMillin Albany LLC v. Superior Court (Carl Van Tassell)

    239 Cal.App.4th 1132 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015)   Cited 3 times   5 Legal Analyses

    F069370 08-26-2015 MCMILLIN ALBANY LLC et al., Petitioners, v. The SUPERIOR COURT of Kern County, Respondent; Carl Van Tassell et al., Real Parties in Interest. Borton Petrini, Calvin R. Stead and Andrew M. Morgan, for Petitioners. Donahue Fitzgerald, Kathleen F. Carpenter ; Ware Law, Amy R. Gowan and Dee A. Ware, for California Building Industry Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Petitioners. Newmeyer & Dillon, Alan H. Packer, J. Nathan Owens, Paul L. Tetzloff and Jeffrey R. Brower, for Leading

  8. Main San Gabriel Basin Watermaster v. State Water Resources Control Board

    12 Cal.App.4th 1371 (Cal. Ct. App. 1993)   Cited 12 times
    In MainSan Gabriel Basin Watermaster v. State Water Resources ControlBd., supra, 12 Cal.App.4th at pages 1381-1382, the court reviewed the legislative history of this exemption, which is not extensive, and concluded there was nothing to indicate that the Legislature did not mean what it said.
  9. English v. County of Alameda

    70 Cal.App.3d 226 (Cal. Ct. App. 1977)   Cited 23 times
    In English, mandate was sought to compel the assessors of the defendant counties to tax the possessory interests of occupants of properties owned by private nonprofit educational and charitable institutions which qualified for exemption from taxation under sections 3, subdivision (e) (section 3(e)) and 4, subdivision (b) (section 4(b)) of article XIII only if their property was used "exclusively for" educational purposes under the former or religious, hospital or charitable purposes under the latter provision.
  10. Superior Strut Hanger Co. v. Port of Oakland

    72 Cal.App.3d 987 (Cal. Ct. App. 1977)   Cited 18 times
    Finding that when a municipality fails to provide adequate procedure for a state relocation assistance claim, a plaintiff may pursue original relief in court
  11. Rule 8.252 - Judicial notice; findings and evidence on appeal

    Cal. R. 8.252   Cited 590 times

    (a)Judicial notice (1) To obtain judicial notice by a reviewing court under Evidence Code section 459, a party must serve and file a separate motion with a proposed order. (2) The motion must state: (A) Why the matter to be noticed is relevant to the appeal; (B) Whether the matter to be noticed was presented to the trial court and, if so, whether judicial notice was taken by that court; (C) If judicial notice of the matter was not taken by the trial court, why the matter is subject to judicial notice