47 Cited authorities

  1. Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist.

    570 U.S. 595 (2013)   Cited 293 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the court could not condition the grant of land use permits upon the applicant's funding of offsite mitigation projects on public land
  2. McKesson Corp. v. Division of Alcoholic Beverages & Tobacco

    496 U.S. 18 (1990)   Cited 487 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the due process clause obligates states to "provide meaningful backward-looking relief to rectify any unconstitutional deprivation" resulting from a tax statute
  3. Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court

    57 Cal.2d 450 (Cal. 1962)   Cited 5,905 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Explaining the "rule requiring a court exercising inferior jurisdiction to follow the decisions of a court exercising a higher jurisdiction"
  4. Webb's Fabulous Pharmacies, Inc. v. Beckwith

    449 U.S. 155 (1980)   Cited 538 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that States may not, "by ipse dixit, ... transform private property into public property without compensation"
  5. Zelig v. County of Los Angeles

    27 Cal.4th 1112 (Cal. 2002)   Cited 955 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
  6. Brown v. Legal Foundation of Wash

    538 U.S. 216 (2003)   Cited 232 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that interest on interpleaded funds exacted by the government could be a per se taking
  7. United States v. Sperry Corp.

    493 U.S. 52 (1989)   Cited 232 times
    Holding a 1.5% tribunal user fee was not unconstitutionally excessive as to constitute a taking (citing Massachusetts , 435 U.S. at 462, 463, 468, 98 S. Ct. at 1165, 1168 )
  8. Loeffler v. Target Corp.

    58 Cal.4th 1081 (Cal. 2014)   Cited 246 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an alleged overcollection of tax could not serve as a predicate for a California consumer protection claim when a business acted in conformity with governing taxing statutes
  9. John v. Superior Court (Sylvia Chan)

    63 Cal.4th 91 (Cal. 2016)   Cited 183 times
    Holding "[s]ection 391.7's prefiling requirements do not apply to a self-represented vexatious litigant's appeal of a judgment or interlocutory order in an action in which he or she was the defendant"
  10. Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. v. City of La Habra

    25 Cal.4th 809 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 271 times
    Holding that city's continued imposition and collection of a tax without voter approval was a continuous violation, and therefore limitations period began anew with each collection and did not bar claims for declaratory and mandamus relief
  11. Section 7

    Cal. Const. art. I § 7   Cited 2,109 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Guaranteeing due process and equal protection
  12. Section 19

    Cal. Const. art. I § 19   Cited 618 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Taking property without just compensation
  13. Section 367 - Real party in interest

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 367   Cited 438 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Providing in part, "Every action must be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest"
  14. Section 548 - State taxation

    12 U.S.C. § 548   Cited 211 times
    Conferring authority upon the states to tax national bank shares
  15. Section 11350 - Judicial declaration as to validity; regulation declared invalid

    Cal. Gov. Code § 11350   Cited 94 times
    Rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act
  16. Section 1300 - Definitions

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1300   Cited 33 times
    Limiting the applicability of "[e]scheat . . . to property the whereabouts of whose owner is unknown or whose owner is unknown"
  17. Section 1656.1 - Addition of sales tax reimbursement to sales price

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1656.1   Cited 28 times
    Establishing a presumption that a customer agrees to "reimburse" the retailer for the sales tax if, among other possibilities, the amount of the tax is shown on the customer's receipt
  18. Section 11340.6 - Petition requesting adoption, amendment or repeal of regulation

    Cal. Gov. Code § 11340.6   Cited 5 times
    Providing caveats where "the right to petition for adoption of a regulation is restricted by statute to a designated group or where the form of procedure for such a petition is otherwise prescribed by statute"
  19. Section 1700 - Reimbursement for Sales Tax

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 18 § 1700   Cited 4 times
    Containing identical language
  20. Section 1591.1 - Specific Medical Devices, Appliances, and Related Supplies

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 18 § 1591.1   Cited 3 times

    (a) Definitions. (1) Physicians, Dentists, Optometrists, and Podiatrists. "Physicians," "dentists," "optometrists," and "podiatrists" are persons authorized by a currently valid and unrevoked license to practice their respective professions in this state. "Physician" means and includes any person holding a valid and unrevoked physician's and surgeon's certificate or certificate to practice medicine and surgery, issued by the Medical Board of California or the Osteopathic Medical Board of California

  21. 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

  22. Rule 8.29 - Service on nonparty public officer or agency

    Cal. R. 8.29   Cited 6 times

    (a)Proof of service When a statute or this rule requires a party to serve any document on a nonparty public officer or agency, the party must file proof of such service with the document unless a statute permits service after the document is filed, in which case the proof of service must be filed immediately after the document is served on the public officer or agency. (Subd (a) relettered effective January 1, 2007; adopted as subd (b).) (b)Identification on cover When a statute or this rule requires