Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
21 California opinions name it 1 courts 1984–2022 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Hellman v. La Cumbre Golf & Country Clubgreen2 sentences2021“In rendering a statement of decision under Code of Civil Procedure section 632, a trial court is required only to state ultimate rather than 9 evidentiary facts; only when it fails to make findings on a material issue which would fairly disclose the trial court’s determination would reversible error result. [Citations.] Even then, if the judgment is otherwise supported, the omission to make such findings is harmless error unless the evidence is sufficient to sustain a finding in the complaining party’s favor which would have the effect of countervailing or destroying other findings. [Citation 2016"Even then, if the judgment is otherwise supported, the omission to make such findings is harmless error unless the evidence is sufficient to sustain a finding in the complaining party's favor which would have the effect of countervailing or destroying other findings. [Citation.] A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error. " (Hellman v. La Cumbre Gulf & Country Club (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1224, 1230 (Hellman).) On appeal, we presume the judgment is supported and will read the statement of decision as containing implied findings that are favorable to the judgment. ( Arceneaux, supra, 5 | 3 | 7 |
People v. Casa Blanca Convalescent Homes, Inc.red2 sentences2018All that is required is an explanation of the factual and legal basis for the court's decision regarding such principal controverted issues at trial as are listed in the request. [Citation.]' ( Nunes Turfgrass, Inc. v. Vaughan-Jacklin Seed Co. (1988) 200 Cal.App.3d 1518 , 1525 [ 246 Cal.Rptr. 823 ] ; [see] People v. Casa Blanca Convalescent Homes, Inc. (1984) 159 Cal.App.3d 509 , 524-525 [ 206 Cal.Rptr. 164 ] ; 7 Witkin, Cal. Procedure [ (4th ed. 1997) ] Trial, § 411.)" ( Kazensky v. City of Merced (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 44 , 67-68, 76 Cal.Rptr.2d 356 .) When constitutional provisions and statu 2018All that is required is an explanation of the factual and legal basis for the court's decision regarding such principal controverted issues at trial as are listed in the request. [Citation.]' ( Nunes Turfgrass, Inc. v. Vaughan-Jacklin Seed Co. (1988) 200 Cal.App.3d 1518 , 1525 [ 246 Cal.Rptr. 823 ] ; [see] People v. Casa Blanca Convalescent Homes, Inc. (1984) 159 Cal.App.3d 509 , 524-525 [ 206 Cal.Rptr. 164 ] ; 7 Witkin, Cal. Procedure [ (4th ed. 1997) ] Trial, § 411.)" ( Kazensky v. City of Merced (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 44 , 67-68, 76 Cal.Rptr.2d 356 .) When constitutional provisions and statu | 2 | 4 |
Colombo Construction Co. v. Panama Union School Districtgreen2 sentences1984It is, therefore, irrelevant that the evidence might also have supported PSSA's version. ( Ibid. ) *599 (4) Furthermore, a trial court rendering a statement of decision under Code of Civil Procedure section 632 is required to state only ultimate rather than evidentiary facts because findings of ultimate facts necessarily include findings on all intermediate evidentiary facts necessary to sustain them. ( Division of Labor Law Enforcement v. Transpacific Transportation Co. (1977) 69 Cal. App.3d 268, 274 [ 137 Cal. Rptr. 855 ].) A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error nor is a judge 1984It is, therefore, irrelevant that the evidence might also have supported PSSA's version. ( Ibid. ) *599 (4) Furthermore, a trial court rendering a statement of decision under Code of Civil Procedure section 632 is required to state only ultimate rather than evidentiary facts because findings of ultimate facts necessarily include findings on all intermediate evidentiary facts necessary to sustain them. ( Division of Labor Law Enforcement v. Transpacific Transportation Co. (1977) 69 Cal. App.3d 268, 274 [ 137 Cal. Rptr. 855 ].) A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error nor is a judge | 2 | 3 |
Div. of Labor Law Enf't v. Transpacific Transp. Co.green2 sentences1984(Division of Labor Law Enforcement v. Transpacific Transportation Co. (1977) 69 Cal.App.3d 268, 274 [ 137 Cal.Rptr. 855 ].) A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error nor is a judge required to make a finding outside the pleadings. 1984(Division of Labor Law Enforcement v. Transpacific Transportation Co. (1977) 69 Cal.App.3d 268, 274 [ 137 Cal.Rptr. 855 ].) A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error nor is a judge required to make a finding outside the pleadings. | 2 | 2 |
Nunes Turfgrass, Inc. v. Vaughan-Jacklin Seed Co.green2 sentences2018All that is required is an explanation of the factual and legal basis for the court's decision regarding such principal controverted issues at trial as are listed in the request. [Citation.]' ( Nunes Turfgrass, Inc. v. Vaughan-Jacklin Seed Co. (1988) 200 Cal.App.3d 1518 , 1525 [ 246 Cal.Rptr. 823 ] ; [see] People v. Casa Blanca Convalescent Homes, Inc. (1984) 159 Cal.App.3d 509 , 524-525 [ 206 Cal.Rptr. 164 ] ; 7 Witkin, Cal. Procedure [ (4th ed. 1997) ] Trial, § 411.)" ( Kazensky v. City of Merced (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 44 , 67-68, 76 Cal.Rptr.2d 356 .) When constitutional provisions and statu 2018All that is required is an explanation of the factual and legal basis for the court's decision regarding such principal controverted issues at trial as are listed in the request. [Citation.]' ( Nunes Turfgrass, Inc. v. Vaughan-Jacklin Seed Co. (1988) 200 Cal.App.3d 1518 , 1525 [ 246 Cal.Rptr. 823 ] ; [see] People v. Casa Blanca Convalescent Homes, Inc. (1984) 159 Cal.App.3d 509 , 524-525 [ 206 Cal.Rptr. 164 ] ; 7 Witkin, Cal. Procedure [ (4th ed. 1997) ] Trial, § 411.)" ( Kazensky v. City of Merced (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 44 , 67-68, 76 Cal.Rptr.2d 356 .) When constitutional provisions and statu | 1 | 4 |
Almanor Lakeside Villas Owners Ass'n. v. Carsongreen1 sentence2022A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error. [Citation.] In issuing a statement of decision, the trial court need not address each question listed in a party’s request.” ’ ” (Ribakoff v. City of Long Beach (2018) 27 Cal.App.5th 150, 163 .) Instead, “[t]o comply with a request for a statement of decision, a court need only fairly disclose its determinations as to the ultimate facts and material issues in the case,” and “ ‘the term “ultimate fact” generally refers to a core fact, such as an essential element of a claim.’ ” (Metis Development LLC v. Bohacek (2011) 200 Cal.App.4th 679, 6 | 1 | 1 |
Duarte v. Chino Community Hospitalgreen1 sentence2016(Duarte v. Chino Community Hospital (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 849, 856 (Duarte); Ballard v. Uribe (1986) 41 Cal.3d 564, 574 .) If an appellant does not provide an adequate record to support a contention of insufficiency of the evidence to support a finding, that contention may be deemed waived. | 1 | 1 |
Wolfe v. Lipsyred2 sentences1986Only where a trial court fails to make findings as to a material issue which would *687 fairly disclose the determination by the trial court would reversible error result. [Citation.] Even though a court fails to make a finding on a particular matter, if the judgment is otherwise supported, the omission to make such finding is harmless error unless the evidence is sufficient to sustain a finding in favor of the complaining party which would have the effect of countervailing or destroying other findings. [Citation.] A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error. [Citation.]” (Accord Wol 1986Only where a trial court fails to make findings as to a material issue which would *687 fairly disclose the determination by the trial court would reversible error result. [Citation.] Even though a court fails to make a finding on a particular matter, if the judgment is otherwise supported, the omission to make such finding is harmless error unless the evidence is sufficient to sustain a finding in favor of the complaining party which would have the effect of countervailing or destroying other findings. [Citation.] A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error. [Citation.]” (Accord Wol | 1 | 1 |
| Yellow Creek Logging Corp. v. Daregreen | 1 | 1 |
Nathanson v. Murphygreen2 sentences1984Our inability to reweigh the evidence does not imply that we are insensitive to the situations of all parties, to wit: the very difficult and heart-rending position the pre-adoptive foster parents find themselves in, having bonded to CHERYL, now three and one-half years old; CHERYL who knows no other parents but the pre-adoptive foster parents who have nurtured her for three years; and the biological parents, EVELINA and EDWIN, who feel they have been wrongfully deprived of their child. (5b) Nevertheless, AW's intent to induce EVELINA to alter her position can be inferred from the fact that sh 1984Our inability to reweigh the evidence does not imply that we are insensitive to the situations of all parties, to wit: the very difficult and heart-rending position the pre-adoptive foster parents find themselves in, having bonded to CHERYL, now three and one-half years old; CHERYL who knows no other parents but the pre-adoptive foster parents who have nurtured her for three years; and the biological parents, EVELINA and EDWIN, who feel they have been wrongfully deprived of their child. (5b) Nevertheless, AW's intent to induce EVELINA to alter her position can be inferred from the fact that sh | 1 | 1 |
Royal v. Langegreen2 sentences1984Our inability to reweigh the evidence does not imply that we are insensitive to the situations of all parties, to wit: the very difficult and heart-rending position the pre-adoptive foster parents find themselves in, having bonded to CHERYL, now three and one-half years old; CHERYL who knows no other parents but the pre-adoptive foster parents who have nurtured her for three years; and the biological parents, EVELINA and EDWIN, who feel they have been wrongfully deprived of their child. (5b) Nevertheless, AW's intent to induce EVELINA to alter her position can be inferred from the fact that sh 1984Our inability to reweigh the evidence does not imply that we are insensitive to the situations of all parties, to wit: the very difficult and heart-rending position the pre-adoptive foster parents find themselves in, having bonded to CHERYL, now three and one-half years old; CHERYL who knows no other parents but the pre-adoptive foster parents who have nurtured her for three years; and the biological parents, EVELINA and EDWIN, who feel they have been wrongfully deprived of their child. (5b) Nevertheless, AW's intent to induce EVELINA to alter her position can be inferred from the fact that sh | 1 | 1 |
Greenawalt v. Rogersgreen2 sentences1984Our inability to reweigh the evidence does not imply that we are insensitive to the situations of all parties, to wit: the very difficult and heart-rending position the pre-adoptive foster parents find themselves in, having bonded to CHERYL, now three and one-half years old; CHERYL who knows no other parents but the pre-adoptive foster parents who have nurtured her for three years; and the biological parents, EVELINA and EDWIN, who feel they have been wrongfully deprived of their child. (5b) Nevertheless, AW's intent to induce EVELINA to alter her position can be inferred from the fact that sh 1984Our inability to reweigh the evidence does not imply that we are insensitive to the situations of all parties, to wit: the very difficult and heart-rending position the pre-adoptive foster parents find themselves in, having bonded to CHERYL, now three and one-half years old; CHERYL who knows no other parents but the pre-adoptive foster parents who have nurtured her for three years; and the biological parents, EVELINA and EDWIN, who feel they have been wrongfully deprived of their child. (5b) Nevertheless, AW's intent to induce EVELINA to alter her position can be inferred from the fact that sh | 1 | 1 |
Hale v. George A. Hormel & Co.green2 sentences1984Our inability to reweigh the evidence does not imply that we are insensitive to the situations of all parties, to wit: the very difficult and heart-rending position the pre-adoptive foster parents find themselves in, having bonded to CHERYL, now three and one-half years old; CHERYL who knows no other parents but the pre-adoptive foster parents who have nurtured her for three years; and the biological parents, EVELINA and EDWIN, who feel they have been wrongfully deprived of their child. (5b) Nevertheless, AW's intent to induce EVELINA to alter her position can be inferred from the fact that sh 1984Our inability to reweigh the evidence does not imply that we are insensitive to the situations of all parties, to wit: the very difficult and heart-rending position the pre-adoptive foster parents find themselves in, having bonded to CHERYL, now three and one-half years old; CHERYL who knows no other parents but the pre-adoptive foster parents who have nurtured her for three years; and the biological parents, EVELINA and EDWIN, who feel they have been wrongfully deprived of their child. (5b) Nevertheless, AW's intent to induce EVELINA to alter her position can be inferred from the fact that sh | 1 | 1 |
De Vrahnos v. Georgegreen2 sentences1984Our inability to reweigh the evidence does not imply that we are insensitive to the situations of all parties, to wit: the very difficult and heart-rending position the pre-adoptive foster parents find themselves in, having bonded to CHERYL, now three and one-half years old; CHERYL who knows no other parents but the pre-adoptive foster parents who have nurtured her for three years; and the biological parents, EVELINA and EDWIN, who feel they have been wrongfully deprived of their child. (5b) Nevertheless, AW's intent to induce EVELINA to alter her position can be inferred from the fact that sh 1984Our inability to reweigh the evidence does not imply that we are insensitive to the situations of all parties, to wit: the very difficult and heart-rending position the pre-adoptive foster parents find themselves in, having bonded to CHERYL, now three and one-half years old; CHERYL who knows no other parents but the pre-adoptive foster parents who have nurtured her for three years; and the biological parents, EVELINA and EDWIN, who feel they have been wrongfully deprived of their child. (5b) Nevertheless, AW's intent to induce EVELINA to alter her position can be inferred from the fact that sh | 1 | 1 |
Balfour, Guthrie & Co. v. Hansengreen2 sentences1984Our inability to reweigh the evidence does not imply that we are insensitive to the situations of all parties, to wit: the very difficult and heart-rending position the pre-adoptive foster parents find themselves in, having bonded to CHERYL, now three and one-half years old; CHERYL who knows no other parents but the pre-adoptive foster parents who have nurtured her for three years; and the biological parents, EVELINA and EDWIN, who feel they have been wrongfully deprived of their child. (5b) Nevertheless, AW's intent to induce EVELINA to alter her position can be inferred from the fact that sh 1984Our inability to reweigh the evidence does not imply that we are insensitive to the situations of all parties, to wit: the very difficult and heart-rending position the pre-adoptive foster parents find themselves in, having bonded to CHERYL, now three and one-half years old; CHERYL who knows no other parents but the pre-adoptive foster parents who have nurtured her for three years; and the biological parents, EVELINA and EDWIN, who feel they have been wrongfully deprived of their child. (5b) Nevertheless, AW's intent to induce EVELINA to alter her position can be inferred from the fact that sh | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ribakoff v. City of Long Beach
green
2 sentences2022A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error. [Citation.] In issuing a statement of decision, the trial court need not address each question listed in a party’s request.” ’ ” (Ribakoff v. City of Long Beach (2018) 27 Cal.App.5th 150, 163 .) Instead, “[t]o comply with a request for a statement of decision, a court need only fairly disclose its determinations as to the ultimate facts and material issues in the case,” and “ ‘the term “ultimate fact” generally refers to a core fact, such as an essential element of a claim.’ ” (Metis Development LLC v. Bohacek (2011) 200 Cal.App.4th 679, 6 2022A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error.” ’ ” (Ribakoff v. City of Long Beach (2018) 27 Cal.App.5th 150, 163 .) Instead, “a court need only fairly disclose its determinations as to the ultimate facts and material issues in the case,” and “ ‘the term “ultimate fact” generally refers to a core fact, such as an essential element of a claim.’ ” (Metis Development LLC v. Bohacek (2011) 200 Cal.App.4th 679, 689 .) 7 II. | 3 | 2021–2022 |
Metis Development LLC v. Bohacek
green
2 sentences2022A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error. [Citation.] In issuing a statement of decision, the trial court need not address each question listed in a party’s request.” ’ ” (Ribakoff v. City of Long Beach (2018) 27 Cal.App.5th 150, 163 .) Instead, “[t]o comply with a request for a statement of decision, a court need only fairly disclose its determinations as to the ultimate facts and material issues in the case,” and “ ‘the term “ultimate fact” generally refers to a core fact, such as an essential element of a claim.’ ” (Metis Development LLC v. Bohacek (2011) 200 Cal.App.4th 679, 6 2022A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error.” ’ ” (Ribakoff v. City of Long Beach (2018) 27 Cal.App.5th 150, 163 .) Instead, “a court need only fairly disclose its determinations as to the ultimate facts and material issues in the case,” and “ ‘the term “ultimate fact” generally refers to a core fact, such as an essential element of a claim.’ ” (Metis Development LLC v. Bohacek (2011) 200 Cal.App.4th 679, 689 .) 7 II. | 2 | 2022–2022 |
Kazensky v. City of Merced
green
2 sentences2018All that is required is an explanation of the factual and legal basis for the court's decision regarding such principal controverted issues at trial as are listed in the request. [Citation.]' ( Nunes Turfgrass, Inc. v. Vaughan-Jacklin Seed Co. (1988) 200 Cal.App.3d 1518 , 1525 [ 246 Cal.Rptr. 823 ] ; [see] People v. Casa Blanca Convalescent Homes, Inc. (1984) 159 Cal.App.3d 509 , 524-525 [ 206 Cal.Rptr. 164 ] ; 7 Witkin, Cal. Procedure [ (4th ed. 1997) ] Trial, § 411.)" ( Kazensky v. City of Merced (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 44 , 67-68, 76 Cal.Rptr.2d 356 .) When constitutional provisions and statu 2018All that is required is an explanation of the factual and legal basis for the court's decision regarding such principal controverted issues at trial as are listed in the request. [Citation.]' ( Nunes Turfgrass, Inc. v. Vaughan-Jacklin Seed Co. (1988) 200 Cal.App.3d 1518 , 1525 [ 246 Cal.Rptr. 823 ] ; [see] People v. Casa Blanca Convalescent Homes, Inc. (1984) 159 Cal.App.3d 509 , 524-525 [ 206 Cal.Rptr. 164 ] ; 7 Witkin, Cal. Procedure [ (4th ed. 1997) ] Trial, § 411.)" ( Kazensky v. City of Merced (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 44 , 67-68, 76 Cal.Rptr.2d 356 .) When constitutional provisions and statu | 2 | 2018–2018 |
Heaps v. Heaps
green
1 sentence2021(Heaps v. Heaps (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 286 , 292-293.) Rather, the “main purpose of an objection to a proposed statement of decision is . . . to bring to the court’s attention inconsistencies between the court’s ruling and the document that is supposed to explain and embody that ruling.” (Id. at p. 292.) Errors in the statement of decision are reviewed for harmless error. ( F.P., supra, 3 Cal.5th at pp. 1107-1108.) Indeed, the complete failure to file a statement of decision after it is requested is subject to harmless error review. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
F.People v. Monier
green
1 sentence2021(Heaps v. Heaps (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 286 , 292-293.) Rather, the “main purpose of an objection to a proposed statement of decision is . . . to bring to the court’s attention inconsistencies between the court’s ruling and the document that is supposed to explain and embody that ruling.” (Id. at p. 292.) Errors in the statement of decision are reviewed for harmless error. ( F.P., supra, 3 Cal.5th at pp. 1107-1108.) Indeed, the complete failure to file a statement of decision after it is requested is subject to harmless error review. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Ballard v. Uribe
green
1 sentence2016(Duarte v. Chino Community Hospital (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 849, 856 (Duarte); Ballard v. Uribe (1986) 41 Cal.3d 564, 574 .) If an appellant does not provide an adequate record to support a contention of insufficiency of the evidence to support a finding, that contention may be deemed waived. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
In Re Marriage of Arceneaux
green
1 sentence2016"Even then, if the judgment is otherwise supported, the omission to make such findings is harmless error unless the evidence is sufficient to sustain a finding in the complaining party's favor which would have the effect of countervailing or destroying other findings. [Citation.] A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error. " (Hellman v. La Cumbre Gulf & Country Club (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1224, 1230 (Hellman).) On appeal, we presume the judgment is supported and will read the statement of decision as containing implied findings that are favorable to the judgment. ( Arceneaux, supra, 5 | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Whittington v. McKinney
green
1 sentence2015"Even then, if the judgment is otherwise supported, the omission to make such findings is harmless error unless the evidence is sufficient to sustain a finding in the complaining party's favor which would have the effect of countervailing or destroying other findings. [Citation.] A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error. [Citation.] The trial court need not discuss each question listed in a party's request." (Hellman v. La Cumbre Golf & Country Club (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1224, 1230 .) 4 A statement of decision " 'also furnishes to the losing party a basis of his motion for a new tr | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Sperber v. Robinson
green
1 sentence2014Proc., § 632.) “It is settled that ‘[i]n rendering a statement of decision under Code of Civil Procedure section 632, a trial court is required only to state ultimate rather than evidentiary facts; only when it fails to make findings on a material issue which would fairly disclose the trial court’s determination would reversible error result. [Citations.] Even then, if the judgment is otherwise supported, the omission to make such findings is harmless error unless the evidence is sufficient to sustain a finding in the complaining party’s favor which would have the effect of countervailing or d | 1 | 2014–2014 |
In Re Marriage of Balcof
green
1 sentence2014A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error. [Citations.] The trial court need not discuss each question listed in a party’s request; all that is required is an explanation of the factual and legal basis of the court’s decision regarding the principal controverted issues at trial as are listed in the request.’ ” (In re Marriage of Balcof (2006) 141 Cal.App.4th 1509, 1531 .) The trial court’s statement of decision amply explained the factual and legal basis of the trial court’s decision regarding the principal controverted issues. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Bauer v. Bauer
green
1 sentence2014(Hellman v. La Cumbre Golf & Country Club (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1224, 1230 ; Bauer v. Bauer (1996) 46 Cal.App.4th 1106, 1118 .) A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error nor is a judge required to make a finding outside the pleadings. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
People v. Dollar Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc.
green
1 sentence2014Proc., § 632.) “It is settled that ‘[i]n rendering a statement of decision under Code of Civil Procedure section 632, a trial court is required only to state ultimate rather than evidentiary facts; only when it fails to make findings on a material issue which would fairly disclose the trial court’s determination would reversible error result. [Citations.] Even then, if the judgment is otherwise supported, the omission to make such findings is harmless error unless the evidence is sufficient to sustain a finding in the complaining party’s favor which would have the effect of countervailing or d | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Kuffel v. Seaside Oil Co.
green
1 sentence2014Proc., § 632.) “It is settled that ‘[i]n rendering a statement of decision under Code of Civil Procedure section 632, a trial court is required only to state ultimate rather than evidentiary facts; only when it fails to make findings on a material issue which would fairly disclose the trial court’s determination would reversible error result. [Citations.] Even then, if the judgment is otherwise supported, the omission to make such findings is harmless error unless the evidence is sufficient to sustain a finding in the complaining party’s favor which would have the effect of countervailing or d | 1 | 2014–2014 |
In Re Cheryl E.
green
1 sentence2014(In re Cheryl E. (1984) 161 Cal.App.3d 587, 599 .) “[A] trial court rendering a statement of decision under Code of Civil Procedure section 632 is required to state only ultimate rather than evidentiary facts because findings of ultimate facts necessarily include findings on all intermediate evidentiary facts necessary to sustain them. [Citation.]” (Ibid.) B. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
In Re Marriage of Garrity and Bishton
red
1 sentence1992(In re Marriage of Garrity and Bishton, supra, 181 Cal.App.3d 675, 687 .) A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Hasson v. Ford Motor Co.
yellow
1 sentence1984It is, therefore, irrelevant that the evidence might also have supported PSSA's version. ( Ibid. ) *599 (4) Furthermore, a trial court rendering a statement of decision under Code of Civil Procedure section 632 is required to state only ultimate rather than evidentiary facts because findings of ultimate facts necessarily include findings on all intermediate evidentiary facts necessary to sustain them. ( Division of Labor Law Enforcement v. Transpacific Transportation Co. (1977) 69 Cal. App.3d 268, 274 [ 137 Cal. Rptr. 855 ].) A failure to find on an immaterial issue is not error nor is a judge | 1 | 1984–1984 |
| McAdams v. McElroy green | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.