31 Cited authorities

  1. Wolf v. Walt Disney

    162 Cal.App.4th 1107 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 402 times
    Holding that, in interpreting a contract, a court may provisionally review extrinsic evidence
  2. Medical v. Genentech

    43 Cal.4th 375 (Cal. 2008)   Cited 262 times
    Holding that when "ascertaining the intent of the parties at the time the contract was executed depends on the credibility of extrinsic evidence, that credibility determination and the interpretation of the contract are questions of fact that may properly be resolved by the jury"
  3. Orcilla v. Big Sur, Inc.

    244 Cal.App.4th 982 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016)   Cited 87 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding a plaintiff pleaded exceptions to the tender ruling elsewhere in the complaint
  4. Brown v. Boren

    74 Cal.App.4th 1303 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999)   Cited 105 times

    B128000 (Super. Ct. No. GC167363) Filed September 17, 1999 Certified for Publication Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Wendell Mortimer, Jr., Judge. Affirmed. John S. Chang for Plaintiff and Appellant. Gary A. Dordick for Defendants and Respondents. INTRODUCTION MASTERSON, J. Plaintiff Mary Lou Brown appeals from the adverse judgment entered after the trial court granted a motion for judgment (Code Civ. Proc., § 631.8) made by defendants Ira J. Boren and Elizabeth

  5. Schabarum v. California Legislature

    60 Cal.App.4th 1205 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 77 times

    Docket No. C020336. January 14, 1998. Appeal from Superior Court of Sacramento County, No. CV530049, James Timothy Ford, Judge. COUNSEL Anthony T. Caso, Deborah J. La Fetra, Victor J. Wolski and Gregory W. McCracken for Plaintiff, Cross-defendant and Appellant. Remcho, Johansen Purcell, Joseph Remcho, Robin B. Johansen, Charles C. Marson, Karen A. Getman and Philip C. Monrad for Defendants, Cross-complainants and Appellants. Bion M. Gregory, Gordon Cologne, Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk

  6. Jones v. Aetna Casualty Surety Co.

    26 Cal.App.4th 1717 (Cal. Ct. App. 1994)   Cited 77 times
    In Jones, the plaintiff leased commercial property from a company, which, under the terms of the lease, promised to obtain rental insurance for damage to the property, payable to the plaintiff that the plaintiff, as lessor, was obligated to pay.
  7. Salazar v. Thomas

    236 Cal.App.4th 467 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015)   Cited 36 times
    Discussing possession
  8. Principal Mutual Life Insurance v. Vars, Pave, McCord & Freedman

    65 Cal.App.4th 1469 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 56 times
    Finding parol evidence may not be used to create a contract the parties did not intend to make or to insert language one or both parties now wish had been included].
  9. Stonehouse Homes v. Sierra Madre

    167 Cal.App.4th 531 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008)   Cited 38 times   1 Legal Analyses

    No. B195552. October 9, 2008. Appeal from the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. BC355516, Ronald M. Sohigian, Judge. Greenberg Glusker Fields Claman Machtinger and Garrett L. Hanken for Plaintiff and Appellant. Colantuono Levin, Sandra J. Levin and Holly O. Whatley for Defendants and Respondents. OPINION FLIER, J. Stonehouse Homes LLC (Stonehouse) appeals an order (judgment) of dismissal entered after the trial court sustained a demurrer to Stonehouse's complaint for declaratory relief with

  10. Garfinkle v. Superior Court

    578 P.2d 945 (Cal. 1978)   Cited 87 times
    Holding that, because California's "nonjudicial foreclosure statutes do not . . . compel inclusion of a power of sale in a deed or trust or provide for such a power of sale when one has not been included by the parties," non-judicial foreclosure proceedings are not state actions
  11. Section 1636

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1636   Cited 1,092 times

    A contract must be so interpreted as to give effect to the mutual intention of the parties as it existed at the time of contracting, so far as the same is ascertainable and lawful. Ca. Civ. Code § 1636

  12. Section 1641

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1641   Cited 742 times
    Specifying that, when interpreting the language of a contract, the court should give effect to every provision
  13. Section 1559

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1559   Cited 370 times
    Permitting a third person to enforce a contract if it was "made expressly for the benefit of a third person"
  14. Section 1161a

    Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1161a   Cited 258 times

    (a) As used in this section: (1) "Manufactured home" has the same meaning as provided in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code. (2) "Mobilehome" has the same meaning as provided in Section 18008 of the Health and Safety Code. (3) "Floating home" has the same meaning as provided in subdivision (d) of Section 18075.55 of the Health and Safety Code. (b) In any of the following cases, a person who holds over and continues in possession of a manufactured home, mobilehome, floating home, or real

  15. Section 2924h

    Cal. Civ. Code § 2924h   Cited 86 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing "present beneficiary of deed of trust under foreclosure shall have the right to offset [its] bid[] . . . to the extent of the total amount due the beneficiary"
  16. Rule 8.520 - Briefs by parties and amici curiae; judicial notice

    Cal. R. 8.520   Cited 362 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