58 Cited authorities

Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co.
25 Cal.4th 826 (Cal. 2001) Cited 4,847 times 2 Legal Analyses
Concluding that the gathering and dissemination of pricing information by the petroleum companies through an independent industry service did not imply collusive action where there was no evidence the information was misused as a basis for an unlawful conspiracy; rather, evidence suggested that individual companies used all available resources “to determine capacity, supply, and pricing decisions which would maximize their own individual profits”
Reid v. Google, Inc.
50 Cal.4th 512 (Cal. 2010) Cited 1,087 times 16 Legal Analyses
Holding that a high degree of foreseeability is required to impose a duty to hire security guards and that “the requisite degree of foreseeability rarely, if ever, can be proven in the absence of prior similar incidents of violent crime on the landowner's premises”
Zelig v. County of Los Angeles
27 Cal.4th 1112 (Cal. 2002) Cited 956 times 2 Legal Analyses
Finding public entity could not be liable under respondeat superior because the plaintiff had failed to allege that the public employees were engaged in conduct within the scope of employment that would render the public employee liable to the plaintiff
Ann M. v. Pacific Plaza Shopping Center
6 Cal.4th 666 (Cal. 1993) Cited 567 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that to impose duty without requisite degree of foreseeability would force landlords to become insurers of public safety
Green v. Ralee Engineering Co
19 Cal.4th 66 (Cal. 1998) Cited 480 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that an employee who reported the sale of defective aircraft parts did state a claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy because his action was directly connected to federal regulation of air safety
Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California
17 Cal.3d 425 (Cal. 1976) Cited 827 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that mental health professionals have a duty to protect individuals who are threatened with physical harm by a patient
Stevenson v. Superior Court
16 Cal.4th 880 (Cal. 1997) Cited 414 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs must establish that the violated public policy is "fundamental and substantial"
Rojo v. Kliger
52 Cal.3d 65 (Cal. 1990) Cited 471 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Unruh Act "has no application to employment discrimination"
Davidson v. City of Westminster
32 Cal.3d 197 (Cal. 1982) Cited 522 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding officers not liable for the plaintiff's injury because the plaintiff alleged the officers merely failed to act timely rather than any affirmative misconduct on the part of the officers
Dillon v. Legg
68 Cal.2d 728 (Cal. 1968) Cited 823 times
Holding that there is no liability for injuries to third parties when the tortfeasor is not found liable
Section 1681 - Sex
20 U.S.C. § 1681 Cited 4,367 times 79 Legal Analyses
Referencing application of Title IX prohibitions to school admissions
Section 28
Cal. Const. art. I § 28 Cited 2,121 times
Granting crime victims the right "[t]o reasonable notice of all public proceedings, including delinquency proceedings, upon request, at which the defendant and the prosecutor are entitled to be present"
Section 13981 - Transferred
42 U.S.C. § 13981 Cited 292 times 2 Legal Analyses
Providing that section 1367 shall not "be construed, by reason of a claim arising under such subsection, to confer on the courts of the United States jurisdiction over any State law claim seeking the establishment of a divorce, alimony, equitable distribution of marital property or child custody decree"
Section 8
Cal. Const. art. I § 8 Cited 197 times
Prohibiting race discrimination
Section 1092 - Institutional and financial assistance information for students
20 U.S.C. § 1092 Cited 107 times 11 Legal Analyses
Requiring funding recipients to collect statistics on crimes motivated by the victim's "gender, ... sexual orientation"

REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA v. S.C. (ROSEN)

58 Cited authorities

Holding that a high degree of foreseeability is required to impose a duty to hire security guards and that “the requisite degree of foreseeability rarely, if ever, can be proven in the absence of prior similar incidents of violent crime on the landowner's premises”

Finding public entity could not be liable under respondeat superior because the plaintiff had failed to allege that the public employees were engaged in conduct within the scope of employment that would render the public employee liable to the plaintiff

Holding that to impose duty without requisite degree of foreseeability would force landlords to become insurers of public safety

Holding that an employee who reported the sale of defective aircraft parts did state a claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy because his action was directly connected to federal regulation of air safety

Holding that mental health professionals have a duty to protect individuals who are threatened with physical harm by a patient

Holding that plaintiffs must establish that the violated public policy is "fundamental and substantial"

Holding that the Unruh Act "has no application to employment discrimination"

Finding officers not liable for the plaintiff's injury because the plaintiff alleged the officers merely failed to act timely rather than any affirmative misconduct on the part of the officers

Holding that there is no liability for injuries to third parties when the tortfeasor is not found liable

Referencing application of Title IX prohibitions to school admissions

Granting crime victims the right "[t]o reasonable notice of all public proceedings, including delinquency proceedings, upon request, at which the defendant and the prosecutor are entitled to be present"

Prohibiting race discrimination

Requiring funding recipients to collect statistics on crimes motivated by the victim's "gender, ... sexual orientation"