§Why CasetextPricing

R. (K.) v. S.C. (PEOPLE)

Petitioner’s Petition for Review with Request for Stay

26 Cited authorities

  1. Blank v. Kirwan

    39 Cal.3d 311 (Cal. 1985)   Cited 3,017 times
    Holding that the standard for a failure to state a claim is whether "the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action"

  2. People v. Arbuckle

    22 Cal.3d 749 (Cal. 1978)   Cited 362 times
    Finding reversible error when trial judge accepts plea bargain but fails to impose the sentence

  3. Daar v. Yellow Cab Co.

    67 Cal.2d 695 (Cal. 1967)   Cited 435 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Using fluid recovery to benefit taxicab customers overcharged by defendant

  4. John L. v. Superior Court

    33 Cal.4th 158 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 133 times
    Recognizing that purpose of statutory scheme is "to rehabilitate juvenile offenders while both protecting the public and holding the person accountable for his misconduct"

  5. People v. Arata

    151 Cal.App.4th 778 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 64 times
    Granting immediate relief under P.C. § 1203.4 despite any technical violation of the statute

  6. Titmas v. Superior Court of Orange County

    87 Cal.App.4th 738 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001)   Cited 33 times
    In Titmas v. Superior Court (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 738, a judge substituting in law and motion telephonically denied, without a hearing, a motion to quash a subpoena based on a claim of attorney-client privilege.

  7. In re Mark L.

    34 Cal.3d 171 (Cal. 1983)   Cited 61 times

    Docket No. Crim. 22845. July 28, 1983. COUNSEL Friedman, Sloan Ross, Stanley J. Friedman, Paul G. Sloan and Lawrence A. Gibbs for Petitioner. George Deukmejian and John K. Van de Kamp, Attorneys General, Robert H. Philibosian, Chief Assistant Attorney General, William D. Stein, Assistant Attorney General, Gloria F. DeHart, Kristofer Jorstad and Mary A. Roth, Deputy Attorneys General, for Respondent. OPINION GRODIN, J. In juvenile court, Mark L., a minor, entered a no contest (Cal. Rules of Court

  8. Shaffer v. Superior Court

    33 Cal.App.4th 993 (Cal. Ct. App. 1995)   Cited 37 times
    Referring to the California rules of professional conduct for assistance in determining when an attorney's attempt to charge or collect an allegedly unconscionable fee constitutes professional malpractice

  9. Universal City Studios v. Superior Court

    110 Cal.App.4th 1273 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003)   Cited 22 times
    In Universal Studios, Inc. v. Superior Court, supra, 110 Cal.App.4th at pages 1283-1284, we described when a contractual obligation not to disclose may give rise to a right to seal a settlement agreement containing a confidentiality clause.

  10. Star Motor Imports, Inc. v. Superior Court

    88 Cal.App.3d 201 (Cal. Ct. App. 1979)   Cited 53 times
    In Star Motor, the court held that Code of Civil Procedure section 446, insofar as that section permits verification on information and belief, does not apply when the verification is to be used as evidence of facts. (88 Cal.App.3d at p. 204.)

  11. Rule 8.500 - Petition for review

    Cal. R. 8.500   Cited 337 times

    (a)Right to file a petition, answer, or reply (1) A party may file a petition in the Supreme Court for review of any decision of the Court of Appeal, including any interlocutory order, except the denial of a transfer of a case within the appellate jurisdiction of the superior court. (2) A party may file an answer responding to the issues raised in the petition. In the answer, the party may ask the court to address additional issues if it grants review. (3) The petitioner may file a reply to the answer

  12. Rule 8.486 - Petitions

    Cal. R. 8.486   Cited 72 times

    (a)Contents of petition (1) If the petition could have been filed first in a lower court, it must explain why the reviewing court should issue the writ as an original matter. (2) If the petition names as respondent a judge, court, board, or other officer acting in a public capacity, it must disclose the name of any real party in interest. (3) If the petition seeks review of trial court proceedings that are also the subject of a pending appeal, the notice "Related Appeal Pending" must appear on the

  13. Rule 8.487 - Opposition and amicus curiae briefs

    Cal. R. 8.487   Cited 29 times

    (a) Preliminary opposition (1) Within 10 days after the petition is filed, the respondent or any real party in interest, separately or jointly, may serve and file a preliminary opposition. (2) A preliminary opposition must contain a memorandum and a statement of any material fact not included in the petition. (3) Within 10 days after a preliminary opposition is filed, the petitioner may serve and file a reply. (4) Without requesting preliminary opposition or waiting for a reply, the court may grant

  14. Rule 8.504 - Form and contents of petition, answer, and reply

    Cal. R. 8.504   Cited 21 times

    (a)In general Except as provided in this rule, a petition for review, answer, and reply must comply with the relevant provisions of rule 8.204. (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2007.) (b) Contents of a petition (1) The body of the petition must begin with a concise, nonargumentative statement of the issues presented for review, framing them in terms of the facts of the case but without unnecessary detail. (2) The petition must explain how the case presents a ground for review under rule 8.500(b)