§Why CasetextPricing

SCHER v. BURKE

Appellants, Richard Erickson, Wendie Malick, Richard Schroder, and Andrea Schroder, Response to Amicus Curiae Brief

16 Cited authorities

  1. People v. Briceno

    34 Cal.4th 451 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 268 times
    Concluding section 1192.7, subdivision (c)'s reference to a felony “violation” of section 186.22 encompassed sentence enhancements under section 186.22, subdivision (b), and not just the felony “offense” of section 186.22

  2. Kirby v. Immoos Fire Protection, Inc.

    53 Cal.4th 1244 (Cal. 2012)   Cited 174 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Holding attorneys' fees “not authorized” for meal or rest period claims

  3. Western Aggregates, Inc. v. County of Yuba

    101 Cal.App.4th 278 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 158 times
    Concluding that members of the public were improperly arrested for trespass because the route was a public road based on historic state interpretation of dedication

  4. In re C.H.

    53 Cal.4th 94 (Cal. 2011)   Cited 99 times
    Construing Welf. & Inst. Code, §§ 731, subd., 733, subd. (c)

  5. Covenant Care, Inc. v. Superior Court

    32 Cal.4th 771 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 122 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In Covenant Care, Inc. v. Superior Court, 86 P.3d 290 (Cal. 2004), the California Supreme Court confronted the sad story of Juan Inclan, an "elder," during his eight-week stay at a "skilled nursing facility."

  6. Friends of the Trails v. Blasius

    78 Cal.App.4th 810 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000)   Cited 59 times
    Denying relief against easement owner was proper when the easement owner had no interest adverse to the plaintiffs

  7. Hanshaw v. Long Valley Rd. Assn.

    116 Cal.App.4th 471 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 22 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding Civ. Code, § 1009 does not abolish implied dedications arising from public nonrecreational use

  8. Pulido v. Pereira

    234 Cal.App.4th 1246 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015)   Cited 10 times   2 Legal Analyses

    C072284 03-05-2015 Antonio PULIDO et al., Cross-complainants and Respondents, v. Alfred Robert PEREIRA, Jr., Individually and as Trustee, etc., Cross-defendant and Appellant. Law Office of Stephanie J. Finelli and Stephanie J. Finelli,Sacramento, for Cross-defendant and Appellant. Law Offices of William E. Barnes, Mark H. Salyer and William E. Barnes, Sacramento, for Cross-complainants and Respondents. BLEASE, Acting P.J. Law Office of Stephanie J. Finelli and Stephanie J. Finelli,Sacramento, for

  9. Gion v. City of Santa Cruz

    2 Cal.3d 29 (Cal. 1970)   Cited 75 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Gion, we noted, "the public use of the land [was] accentuated by the active participation of the city in maintaining the land and helping the public to enjoy it."

  10. Burch v. Gombos

    82 Cal.App.4th 352 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000)   Cited 16 times
    Upholding a finding of implied public dedication of a one-lane dirt road in the Santa Cruz Mountains

  11. Rule 8.204 - Contents and format of briefs

    Cal. R. 8.204   Cited 4,133 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