§Why CasetextPricing

McMILLIN ALBANY v. S.C.

Petitioners’ Answer Brief on the Merits

26 Cited authorities

  1. In re Dannenberg

    34 Cal.4th 1061 (Cal. 2005)   Cited 650 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a California prisoner has no right to a release date prior to being deemed suitable for parole because state law does not provide such a right

  2. Renee J. v. Superior Court (Orange County Social Services Agency)

    26 Cal.4th 735 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 673 times
    Noting the Legislature's provision of six months of reunification services when the child is under age three at the time of removal from the physical custody of the parent

  3. Lee v. Hanley

    61 Cal.4th 1225 (Cal. 2015)   Cited 314 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that § 340.6 did not bar plaintiff's fee dispute claim that attorney refused to return unearned attorney's fees, because the claim could also be construed as conversion

  4. People v. Elmore

    59 Cal.4th 121 (Cal. 2014)   Cited 316 times
    Concluding "[u]nreasonable self-defense was never intended to encompass reactions to threats that exist only in the defendant's mind"

  5. AAS v. SUPERIOR COURT

    24 Cal.4th 627 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 277 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Finding diminished value of residences containing hazardous defects not compensable

  6. In re Reeves

    35 Cal.4th 765 (Cal. 2005)   Cited 174 times
    Noting " period of presentence confinement is indivisibly attributed to all of the offenses with which the prisoner is charged and of which he is eventually convicted"; holding, under § 2933.1(c), courts cannot "parse such a single, unitary period of presentence confinement into hypothetical overlapping terms eligible to earn credit at different rates"

  7. L.A. Cnty. Dep't of Children & Family Servs. v. William C. (In re Ethan C.)

    54 Cal.4th 610 (Cal. 2012)   Cited 139 times
    Examining Oxford English Dictionary and Black's Law Dictionary to construe the word “neglect”

  8. People v. Yartz

    37 Cal.4th 529 (Cal. 2005)   Cited 136 times
    In People v. Yartz (2005) 37 Cal.4th 529, 532, 36 Cal.Rptr.3d 328, 123 P.3d 604 (Yartz), our high court addressed whether a prior plea of nolo contendere to a child molestation offense could be used to find the defendant to be a sexually violent predator (SVP) under section 6600 et seq., the Sexually Violent Predators Act (SVPA).

  9. Kulshrestha v. First Union Commercial Corp.

    33 Cal.4th 601 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 121 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding substantial compliance inapplicable because "[n]othing suggests that the [required item] is pointless or optional"

  10. Riverside Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't v. Stiglitz

    60 Cal.4th 624 (Cal. 2014)   Cited 68 times

    No. S206350. 12-01-2014 RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Jan STIGLITZ, as Hearing Officer, etc., Defendant and Respondent; Kristy Drinkwater, Real Party in Interest and Respondent; Riverside Sheriffs' Association, Intervener and Appellant. Riverside County Sheriff's Department, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Jan Stiglitz, as Hearing Officer, etc., Defendant and Respondent; Kristy Drinkwater, Real Party in Interest. Hayes & Cunningham, San Diego, Dennis J. Hayes, Adam

  11. Section 896 - Liability and claims limited to listed standards; applicability of title; inapplicability to condominium conversions

    Cal. Civ. Code § 896   Cited 66 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Listing construction defects for which the developer is liable

  12. Rule 8.520 - Briefs by parties and amici curiae; judicial notice

    Cal. R. 8.520   Cited 3,160 times

    (a)Parties' briefs; time to file (1) Within 30 days after the Supreme Court files the order of review, the petitioner must serve and file in that court either an opening brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (2) Within 30 days after the petitioner files its brief or the time to do so expires, the opposing party must serve and file either an answer brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (3) The petitioner may file a reply brief on the merits or

  13. Rule 3.1312 - Preparation and submission of proposed order

    Cal. R. 3.1312   Cited 69 times

    (a) Prevailing party to prepare Unless the parties waive notice or the court orders otherwise, the party prevailing on any motion must, within five days of the ruling, serve by any means authorized by law and reasonably calculated to ensure delivery to the other party or parties no later than the close of the next business day a proposed order for approval as conforming to the court's order. Within five days after service, the other party or parties must notify the prevailing party as to whether

  14. Rule 2.251 - Electronic service

    Cal. R. 2.251   Cited 15 times

    (a)Authorization for electronic service When a document may be served by mail, express mail, overnight delivery, or fax transmission, the document may be served electronically under Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6, Penal Code section 690.5, and the rules in this chapter. For purposes of electronic service made pursuant to Penal Code section 690.5, express consent to electronic service is required.[]= (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2022; previously amended effective January 1, 2007

  15. Rule 2.306 - Service of papers by fax transmission

    Cal. R. 2.306   Cited 12 times

    (a) Service by fax (1)Agreement of parties required Service by fax transmission is permitted only if the parties agree and a written confirmation of that agreement is made. (2)Service on last-given fax number Any notice or other document to be served must be transmitted to a fax machine maintained by the person on whom it is served at the fax machine telephone number as last given by that person on any document that the party has filed in the case and served on the party making service. (b) Service

  16. Rule 2.301 - Definitions

    Cal. R. 2.301   Cited 5 times

    As used in this chapter, unless the context otherwise requires: (1) "Fax" is an abbreviation for "facsimile" and refers, as indicated by the context, to facsimile transmission or to a document so transmitted. (2) "Fax transmission" means the transmission of a document by a system that encodes a document into electrical signals, transmits these electrical signals over a telephone line, and reconstructs the signals to print a duplicate of the original document at the receiving end. (3) "Fax machine"