next step analysis in California

2016(See Committee to Save Hollywoodland, supra, 161 Cal.App.4th at p. 1187 .) III.

2016(See Committee to Save Hollywoodland, supra, 161 Cal.App.4th at p. 1187 .) III.

2016The general plan is the charter to which the ordinance must conform.’ [Citation.] The same rule applies to this case.” (City of Irvine v. Irvine Citizens Against Overdevelopment (1994) 25 Cal.App.4th 868, 879 .) Given the above, we conclude that the City may not rely on an exemption from CEQA, it must proceed to the next step of the analysis and conduct an initial threshold study to see if the proposed Amendment will have a significant impact upon the environment to determine whether a negative declaration may be issued.

2016The general plan is the charter to which the ordinance must conform.’ [Citation.] The same rule applies to this case.” (City of Irvine v. Irvine Citizens Against Overdevelopment (1994) 25 Cal.App.4th 868, 879 .) Given the above, we conclude that the City may not rely on an exemption from CEQA, it must proceed to the next step of the analysis and conduct an initial threshold study to see if the proposed Amendment will have a significant impact upon the environment to determine whether a negative declaration may be issued.

2023Resolving the Ambiguity The next step of our analysis of the meaning of the 1915 Agreement is to resolve the ambiguity about the scope of the verb “maintaining.” (See Scheenstra, supra, 213 Cal.App.4th at p. 390 .) No conflicting extrinsic evidence was presented by the parties 19. and, therefore, “the resolution of the ambiguity is a question of law, which is subject to independent review on appeal.” (Ibid.) Stated another way, we treat “the interpretation of the written contract as solely a judicial function.” (Ibid.) When resolving an ambiguity, a court must consider the word or phrase in co

2023Resolving the Ambiguity The next step of our analysis of the meaning of the 1915 Agreement is to resolve the ambiguity about the scope of the verb “maintaining.” (See Scheenstra, supra, 213 Cal.App.4th at p. 390 .) No conflicting extrinsic evidence was presented by the parties 19. and, therefore, “the resolution of the ambiguity is a question of law, which is subject to independent review on appeal.” (Ibid.) Stated another way, we treat “the interpretation of the written contract as solely a judicial function.” (Ibid.) When resolving an ambiguity, a court must consider the word or phrase in co

2023(Adams v. MHC Colony Park, L.P., supra, 224 Cal.App.4th at p. 622 .) In this case, that context includes the whole of the 1915 Agreement and the law as it existed at the time the agreement was drafted and signed.

2023(Adams v. MHC Colony Park, L.P., supra, 224 Cal.App.4th at p. 622 .) In this case, that context includes the whole of the 1915 Agreement and the law as it existed at the time the agreement was drafted and signed.

2021(Wilson, supra, 7 Cal.5th at p. 884 .) B.

2019Joseph Health System (2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 851, 859 , disapproved on another ground in Wilson v. Cable News Network, Inc. (2019) 7 Cal.5th 871, 892 .) “Second—if the defendant meets its burden of showing all or part of its activity was protected—then the court proceeds to the next step of the inquiry.

2018(Compare § 1473.7, subds. (b)(1) & (2), (c) with 1473.6, subd. (d)(1) & (2).) Thus, on a plain reading of the statute, it appears a moving party can seek relief under it if he or she satisfies the statute's three requirements." ( Perez , supra , 19 Cal.App.5th at pp. 826-827, 228 Cal.Rptr.3d 95 .) The next step in the analysis is whether defendant satisfies the required elements to bring a motion under section 1473.7.

2018(Compare § 1473.7, subds. (b)(1) & (2), (c) with 1473.6, subd. (d)(1) & (2).) Thus, on a plain reading of the statue, it appears a moving party can seek relief under it if he or she satisfies the statute’s three requirements.” ( Perez, supra, 19 Cal.App.5th at pp. 826-827.) The next step in the analysis is whether defendant satisfies the required elements to bring a motion under section 1473.7.

2026(Connick v. Myers, supra, 461 U.S. at p. 146 , fn. omitted; see also Garcetti v. Ceballos, supra, 547 U.S. at p. 418 .) Accordingly, we have no reason to proceed to the next step of the analysis or to consider Lopez’s arguments challenging CDCR’s proffered reasons for disciplining her in the context of her First Amendment defense. 15 III Due Process Notice–Inexcusable Neglect of Duty Lopez argues the SPB violated her right to due process notice, as well as its own precedent, by sustaining the charge of inexcusable neglect of duty.

2025Factors the Supreme Court directs us to consider in addressing this policy issue “include: ‘the foreseeability of harm to the plaintiff, the degree of certainty that the plaintiff suffered injury, the closeness of the connection between the defendant’s conduct and the injury suffered, the moral blame attached to the defendant’s conduct, the policy of preventing future harm, the extent of the burden to the defendant and consequences to the community of imposing a duty to exercise care with resulting liability for breach, and the availability, cost, and prevalence of insurance for the risk invol

2025(See id. at pp. 377, 386-391, italics added.) To satisfy this standard, the permit condition (e.g., impact fee) must have “rough proportionality” to the proposed development’s impact or burden on the government’s land-use interest (here, reducing traffic congestion), and must not require a landowner to give up (here, pay) more than is necessary to mitigate the harm (social costs) resulting from the new development. ( Sheetz, supra, 601 U.S. at pp. 275-276; see Dolan, supra, 512 U.S. at pp. 388-396; Koontz, supra, 570 U.S. at pp. 612-615, 619 [monetary exactions must satisfy the rough proportio

2025Factors the Supreme Court directs us to consider in addressing this policy issue “include: ‘the foreseeability of harm to the plaintiff, the degree of certainty that the plaintiff suffered injury, the closeness of the connection between the defendant’s conduct and the injury suffered, the moral blame attached to the defendant’s conduct, the policy of preventing future harm, the extent of the burden to the defendant and consequences to the community of imposing a duty to exercise care with resulting liability for breach, and the availability, cost, and prevalence of insurance for the risk invol

2023“The pleadings define the issues to be considered on a motion for summary judgment.” (Ferrari v. Grand Canyon Dories (1995) 32 Cal.App.4th 248, 252 .) “Summary judgment cannot be granted on a ground not raised by the pleadings. [Citation.] Conversely, summary judgment cannot be denied on a ground not raised by the pleadings. [Citations.]” (Bostrom v. County of San Bernardino (1995) 35 Cal.App.4th 1654, 1663 , italics omitted.) “The next step in the analysis calls for an evaluation of the moving defendant’s effort to 4 meet the burden of showing that plaintiff's cause of action has no merit or

2022We begin our analysis with the fundamental principle that a trial court’s order “is presumed to be correct, and all intendments and presumptions are indulged to support it on matters as to which the record is silent. [Citation.] It is the appellant’s burden to affirmatively demonstrate error. [Citations.]” (In re Marriage of Gray (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 974 , 977– 978.) The next step in our analysis of Petrolink’s appeal is to determine the applicable standard of review.

2021The failure to appoint counsel in a proceeding under section 1170.95 is an error of state statutory law only, and not a violation of a defendant’s constitutional rights. ( Lewis, supra, 11 Cal.5th at pp. 972-973.) Accordingly, 3 The Supreme Court issued its opinion in Lewis after the parties had filed their appellate briefs in this matter.

2021(See § 425.16, subd. (b); Park, supra, 2 Cal.5th at p. 1063 .) The next step in the analysis is to determine whether each of these actions constitutes protected activity under the anti-SLAPP statute.

2021(See § 425.16, subd. (b); Park, supra, 2 Cal.5th at p. 1063 .) The next step in the analysis is to determine whether each of these actions constitutes protected activity under the anti-SLAPP statute.

2019Joseph Health System (2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 851, 859 , disapproved on another ground in Wilson v. Cable News Network, Inc. (2019) 7 Cal.5th 871, 892 .) “Second—if the defendant meets its burden of showing all or part of its activity was protected—then the court proceeds to the next step of the inquiry.

2017At this stage — applying the second prong of the anti-SLAPP test — the court asks “whether the plaintiff has demonstrated a probability of prevailing on the claim.” (Equilon, supra, 29 Cal.4th at p. 67 .) An appellate court reviews a trial court‟s ruling on an anti-SLAPP motion de novo, applying the legal principles and two-prong test discussed above.

2015Sufficiency of the Particular Facts Alleged The next step of our analysis is to review the FAC to determine whether Davis has alleged facts sufficient to support his legal theory that the Facilities Lease was subject to competitive bidding because Fresno Unified failed to satisfy the statutory criterion for use of the buildings by the school district “during the term of the lease.” (§ 17406(a)(1).) Paragraph No. 24 of the FAC alleged that Fresno Unified “does not have the right or practical ability to have beneficial occupancy of the demised premises during the term of the Facilities Lease to

2014Although one step remained—completely entering the bathroom—before Taplin could have committed the battery, our case law does not establish a next-step test but considers whether the actor had the “ability to inflict injury on the present occassion.” (Chance, supra, 44 Cal.4th at p. 1168 .) Based on the entire record, the jury could have reasonably concluded Taplin had the present ability to perform an act that by its nature would directly and probably result in the application of force to J. 13 III.

2013Hence the rule is that the prior judgment is res judicata on matters which were raised or could have been raised, on matters litigated or litigable." (Ibid.) In the next step of the analysis, we consider whether Davis's due process arguments must change our conclusion, under applicable rules, that issue preclusion applies and ends this case. 12 IV DUE PROCESS ARGUMENTS Even if issue preclusion may properly be applied in Davis's case, we also consider whether the public policy considerations enumerated in Lucido, supra, 51 Cal.3d at page 343 , should nevertheless permit his desired further liti

2013Hence the rule is that the prior judgment is res judicata on matters which were raised or could have been raised, on matters litigated or litigable." (Ibid.) In the next step of the analysis, we consider whether Davis's due process arguments must change our conclusion, under applicable rules, that issue preclusion applies and ends this case. 12 IV DUE PROCESS ARGUMENTS Even if issue preclusion may properly be applied in Davis's case, we also consider whether the public policy considerations enumerated in Lucido, supra, 51 Cal.3d at page 343 , should nevertheless permit his desired further liti

2013Having resolved the factual issue regarding the cost to repair the elevator in favor of the judgment (Jessup Farms, supra, 33 Cal.3d at p. 660 ), the next step in the analysis is to compare the repair cost to six months’ base rent.

2010(Zamos v. Stroud, supra, 32 Cal.4th at p. 965 .) Defendants contend that Smith cannot establish the requisite level of merit because (1) he cannot show that he exhausted his internal and judicial remedies relating to the claim, (2) the claim is barred by res judicata or collateral estoppel, and (3) the claim is barred by statutory privileges set forth in the Civil Code. 1.-4. * 5.

2005The rule generally provides that “[a] cause of action for civil conspiracy may not arise ... if the alleged conspirator, though a participant in the agreement underlying the injury, was not personally bound by the duty violated by the wrongdoing and was acting only as the agent or employee of the party who did have that duty.” (Doctors’ Co., supra, 49 Cal.3d at p. 44 ; see also *825 Applied, supra, 7 Cal.4th at p. 512 ; Pavicich, supra, 85 Cal.App.4th at p. 394 .) In other words, an attorney acting only within the scope of his or her official duties who is not personally bound by the duty viol

2005The rule generally provides that “[a] cause of action for civil conspiracy may not arise ... if the alleged conspirator, though a participant in the agreement underlying the injury, was not personally bound by the duty violated by the wrongdoing and was acting only as the agent or employee of the party who did have that duty.” (Doctors’ Co., supra, 49 Cal.3d at p. 44 ; see also *825 Applied, supra, 7 Cal.4th at p. 512 ; Pavicich, supra, 85 Cal.App.4th at p. 394 .) In other words, an attorney acting only within the scope of his or her official duties who is not personally bound by the duty viol