California Codes
Cal. Civil Code § 22.2 (2026)
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov
JustiaCode on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
The common law of England, so far as it is not repugnant to or inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, or the Constitution or laws of this State, is the rule of decision in all the courts of this State.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 39
cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1955–2024 · leading case: United States v. Jorge Rodriguez, 711 F.3d 541 (5th Cir. 2013).
United States v. Jorge Rodriguez, 711 F.3d 541 (5th Cir. 2013). “CODE § 1-3-1; CAL. CIV. CODE § 22.2; HAW. REV. STAT. § 1-1; IDAHO CODE § 73-116; MONT.”
State of California Ex Rel. State Lands Comm'n v. Superior Court, 900 P.2d 648 (Cal. 1995). “) The landowners also argue that because California is, and since 1850 has been, a common law state (Civ. Code, § 22.2 [5] ; see Stats. 1850, ch.”
Baltayan v. Est. of Getemyan, 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6462 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001). “persones and all other officers requisite and necessarie to be hadde for the spede of the seid duties without any rewards for their Councelles help and besynes in the same; and the same lawe and ordre shalbe observed and kepte of all such suytes to be made afore the Kingis…”
Cole v. Rush, 289 P.2d 450 (Cal. 1955). “, § 377), but there was no adoption of a statute imposing liability in such a case as is now before us.”
United States v. Ray Shumway Molly Shumway, 199 F.3d 1093 (9th Cir. 1999). “”); Cal. Civ.Code § 22.2 (West 1982) ("The common law of England, so far as it is not repugnant to or inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, or the Constitution or laws of this State, is the rule of decision in all the courts of this State.”
Stephen Slesinger, Inc. v. Walt Disney Co., 66 Cal. Rptr. 3d 268 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007). “16 Civil Code section 22.2 provides: “The common law of England, so far as it is not repugnant to or inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, or the Constitution or laws of this State, is the rule of decision in all the courts of this State.”
Lowman v. Stafford, 29 Cal. Comp. Cases 326 (Cal. Ct. App. 1964). “2d 720, 726 [192P.2d 916].) We are mindful also that the common law of England is the rule of decision in California courts only so far as it is not repugnant to or inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, or the Constitution or laws of California.”
Klein v. Klein, 376 P.2d 70 (Cal. 1962). “(Civ. Code, § 22.2: “The common law of England, so far as it is not repugnant to or inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, or the Constitution or laws of this State, is the rule of decision in all the courts of this State.”
Eldee-K Rental Props., LLC v. Directv, Inc., 748 F.3d 943 (9th Cir. 2014). “70 ; see also Cal. Civ.Code § 22.2 (“The common law of England, so far as it is not repugnant to or inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, or the Constitution or laws of this State, is the rule of decision in all the courts of this State.”
Ferguson v. Keays, 484 P.2d 70 (Cal. 1971). “” (Civ. Code, § 22.2.) Although the Rucker case, supra, without citation of authority, questioned whether at common law the right to sue in forma pauperis extended to appeals or writs of error, several English cases prior to 1850 (when the common law was incorporated into our…”
People v. Valenzuela, 86 Cal. App. 3d 427 (Cal. Ct. App. 1978). “) Hence, it is suggested, the application of rule 977 to preclude reference to nonpublished opinions is violative of Civil Code section 22.2. This position is not well taken.”
Dry Creek Valley Ass'n Inc. v. Bd. of Supervisors of Sonoma Cty., 67 Cal. App. 3d 839 (Cal. Ct. App. 1977). “Civil Code section 22.2 thus becomes relevant to our discussion.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.