§Why CasetextPricing

McCLAIN v. SAV-ON DRUGS

Appellants’ Reply Brief on the Merits

29 Cited authorities

  1. Cohen v. Beneficial Loan Corp.

    337 U.S. 541 (1949)   Cited 7,645 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that § 1291 permits appeals from certain decisions "collateral to rights asserted in the action," even when there's no final judgment

  2. Cel-Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co.

    20 Cal.4th 163 (Cal. 1999)   Cited 2,419 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Holding that for an act to be "unfair," it must "threaten" a violation of law or "violate the policy or spirit of one of those laws because its effects are comparable to or the same as a violation of the law"

  3. 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

  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. 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

  6. Carma Developers, Inc. v. Marathon Development California, Inc.

    2 Cal.4th 342 (Cal. 1992)   Cited 775 times
    Holding that a clause in a commercial lease allowing the lessor to terminate the lease and recapture the leasehold upon notice by the lessee of intent to sublet or assign had to be exercised in good faith

  7. 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

  8. Pacific Gas E. Co. v. G.W. Thomas Drayage Etc. Co.

    69 Cal.2d 33 (Cal. 1968)   Cited 1,022 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the court erroneously refused to consider extrinsic evidence offered to prove the meaning of a provision to which it was reasonably susceptible

  9. Hodel v. Irving

    481 U.S. 704 (1987)   Cited 169 times
    Holding federal law regulating "descent and devise of Indian lands" violated the Takings Clause

  10. Doyle v. Oklahoma Bar Assn

    998 F.2d 1559 (10th Cir. 1993)   Cited 197 times
    Holding plaintiff lacked standing to challenge under §1983 the disposition of his complaint against an attorney

  11. 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