§Why CasetextPricing

M., BIANKA v. S.C.

Amicus Curiae Brief of Family Violence Appellate Project; University of California, Irvine School of Law Domestic Violence Clinic; Alternatives to Violence; California Women’s Law Center; Domestic Violence Legal Empowerment and Appeals Project; Wendy M. Seiden; Legal Aid Society of Orange County and Community Legal Services in Southeast Los Angeles; Los Angeles Center for Law and Justice; and San Diego Volunteer Lawyer Program, Inc.;

15 Cited authorities

  1. Hanson v. Denckla

    357 U.S. 235 (1958)   Cited 7,865 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that personal jurisdiction over defendant trustee was inappropriate when defendant's only contacts with the forum resulted from plaintiff-settlor's unilateral activity of moving to Florida

  2. In re Zacharia D

    6 Cal.4th 435 (Cal. 1993)   Cited 764 times
    Finding of detriment would have led to finding that placement was not in minors' best interests

  3. People v. American Contractors Indemnity Co.

    33 Cal.4th 653 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 420 times
    Holding that a voidable judgment is "valid until it is set aside"

  4. Gonzalez v. Munoz

    156 Cal.App.4th 413 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 238 times
    Recognizing that judges in family court are "necessarily expected to play a far more active role" during Domestic Violence Protection Act proceedings, "in light of the vulnerability of the targeted population (largely unrepresented women and their minor children)"

  5. Ritchie v. Konrad

    115 Cal.App.4th 1275 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 180 times
    Holding that a protection order may be renewed permanently upon a finding of a "reasonable apprehension of future abuse" and squarely rejecting an "imminent danger" standard because it would fall short of fulfilling the statute's purpose of preventing future acts of abuse

  6. Hernandez v. Ashcroft

    345 F.3d 824 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 165 times
    Holding that "battery is clearly a factual determination, readily resolved by the application of a legal standard defining battery to the facts in question"

  7. In re Marriage of Fajota

    230 Cal.App.4th 1487 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014)   Cited 91 times
    Noting that "[i]f a domestic violence restraining order has been issued, then it is clear that there has been a finding of domestic violence sufficient to trigger the presumption"

  8. Babalola v. Superior Court (People)

    192 Cal.App.4th 948 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011)   Cited 53 times
    Requiring notice in advance of hearing for criminal protective order

  9. Noergaard v. Noergaard

    244 Cal.App.4th 76 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015)   Cited 14 times

    G049854 12-16-2015 Christian Thorsen NOERGAARD, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Tammy NOERGAARD, Defendant and Appellant. Tammy Noergaard, in pro. per; and Merritt McKeon, Santa Ana, for Defendant and Appellant. American Overseas Domestic Violence Center and Voices Set Free—Intercept Abuse as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Appellant. Family Violence Appellate Project, Nancy K.D. Lemon, Jennafer Dorfman Wagner, and Shuray Ghorishi; O'Melveny & Myers, Sharon M. Bunzel, Ward A. Penfold, Gabriel

  10. In re Marriage of Leonard

    122 Cal.App.3d 443 (Cal. Ct. App. 1981)   Cited 31 times
    Construing May as limited to whether a state is required to recognize a custody order under Full Faith and Credit Clause

  11. Section 1101 - Definitions

    8 U.S.C. § 1101   Cited 16,343 times   92 Legal Analyses
    Finding notice and comment rulemaking is required for the agency's interim rule recognizing fear of coercive family practices as basis for refugee status

  12. Section 1357 - Powers of immigration officers and employees

    8 U.S.C. § 1357   Cited 658 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Granting immigration enforcement authority to state or local government officials in a formal agreement with a state or local government.

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

    Cal. R. 8.520   Cited 3,153 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

  14. Rule 8.208 - Certificate of Interested Entities or Persons

    Cal. R. 8.208   Cited 17 times

    (a)Purpose and intent The California Code of Judicial Ethics states the circumstances under which an appellate justice must disqualify himself or herself from a proceeding. The purpose of this rule is to provide justices of the Courts of Appeal with additional information to help them determine whether to disqualify themselves from a proceeding. (b)Application This rule applies in appeals in civil cases other than family, juvenile, guardianship, and conservatorship cases. (Subd (b) adopted effective