18 California opinions name it 3 courts 1866–2024 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Bush v. Greenleafgreen2 sentences1962Supp. 575, citing Estate of Tompkins, 123 Cal.App. 670 [ 11 P.2d 886 ].) The presumption in favor of community property is disputable and may be controverted by evidence “even by an inference tending to prove the contrary intention.” (Estate of Bryant, 3 Cal.2d 58, 68 [ 43 P.2d 529 ].)’ ” Appellant relies heavily on the rule stated in Berry v. Berry, 117 Cal.App.2d 624 [ 256 P.2d 646 ], and a number of similar cases. 1962Supp. 575, citing Estate of Tompkins, 123 Cal.App. 670 [ 11 P.2d 886 ].) The presumption in favor of community property is disputable and may be controverted by evidence “even by an inference tending to prove the contrary intention.” (Estate of Bryant, 3 Cal.2d 58, 68 [ 43 P.2d 529 ].)’ ” Appellant relies heavily on the rule stated in Berry v. Berry, 117 Cal.App.2d 624 [ 256 P.2d 646 ], and a number of similar cases. | 3 | 3 |
Estate of Nicksongreen2 sentences1931In discussing the character and quantum of evidence necessary to rebut the presumption relied upon by appellants, Mr. Justice Bichards in the recent case of Estate of Nickson, 187 Cal. 603 [ 203 Pac. 106 ], in speaking for the entire court, said: ‘We are of the opinion that it is incumbent on the party seeking to overcome the presumption of community property to do no more than to produce such legal evidence as, under all the circumstances of the case, would ordinarily produce conviction to an unprejudiced mind, and that in the face of such evidence the naked presumption, unsupported by any te 1931In discussing the character and quantum of evidence necessary to rebut the presumption relied upon by appellants, Mr. Justice Bichards in the recent case of Estate of Nickson, 187 Cal. 603 [ 203 Pac. 106 ], in speaking for the entire court, said: ‘We are of the opinion that it is incumbent on the party seeking to overcome the presumption of community property to do no more than to produce such legal evidence as, under all the circumstances of the case, would ordinarily produce conviction to an unprejudiced mind, and that in the face of such evidence the naked presumption, unsupported by any te | 1 | 3 |
CHIATELLO v. City and County of San Franciscogreen1 sentence2024“It has long been established that suits to enjoin the collection of taxes may not be maintained even though the imposition of the tax may be ‘illegal and void.’” (Flying Dutchman, supra, 93 Cal.App.4th at p. 1141 ; see Chiatello, supra, 189 Cal.App.4th at pp. 492-493 [historically, “a tax would be enjoined only in very rare instances where more than a naked claim of illegality was raised[, and] ‘“[a] suit in equity will not lie to restrain the collection of a tax on the sole ground that the tax is illegal”’”].) Nor does a petitioner’s alleged inability to pay the assessment and the resulting | 1 | 1 |
Hannewinkle v. Georgetowngreen2 sentences2010There must exist in addition, special circumstances bringing the case under some recognized head of equity jurisdiction, such as that enforcement of the tax would lead to a multiplicity of suits or produce irreparable injury, or where the property is real estate, throw a cloud upon the title of the complainant.’ ” 9 (Hannewinkle v. Georgetown (1872) 82 U.S. 547, 549 [ 21 L.Ed. 231 ] [quoting Dows\\ accord, e.g., State Railroad Tax Cases (1875) 92 U.S. 575, 613-614 [ 23 L.Ed. 663 ]; Cheatham et al. v. United States (1875) 92 U.S. 85, 89 [ 23 L.Ed. 561 ].) This reasoning was also adopted by the 2010There must exist in addition, special circumstances bringing the case under some recognized head of equity jurisdiction, such as that enforcement of the tax would lead to a multiplicity of suits or produce irreparable injury, or where the property is real estate, throw a cloud upon the title of the complainant.’ ” 9 (Hannewinkle v. Georgetown (1872) 82 U.S. 547, 549 [ 21 L.Ed. 231 ] [quoting Dows\\ accord, e.g., State Railroad Tax Cases (1875) 92 U.S. 575, 613-614 [ 23 L.Ed. 663 ]; Cheatham et al. v. United States (1875) 92 U.S. 85, 89 [ 23 L.Ed. 561 ].) This reasoning was also adopted by the | 1 | 1 |
Cheatham v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2010There must exist in addition, special circumstances bringing the case under some recognized head of equity jurisdiction, such as that enforcement of the tax would lead to a multiplicity of suits or produce irreparable injury, or where the property is real estate, throw a cloud upon the title of the complainant.’ ” 9 (Hannewinkle v. Georgetown (1872) 82 U.S. 547, 549 [ 21 L.Ed. 231 ] [quoting Dows\\ accord, e.g., State Railroad Tax Cases (1875) 92 U.S. 575, 613-614 [ 23 L.Ed. 663 ]; Cheatham et al. v. United States (1875) 92 U.S. 85, 89 [ 23 L.Ed. 561 ].) This reasoning was also adopted by the 2010There must exist in addition, special circumstances bringing the case under some recognized head of equity jurisdiction, such as that enforcement of the tax would lead to a multiplicity of suits or produce irreparable injury, or where the property is real estate, throw a cloud upon the title of the complainant.’ ” 9 (Hannewinkle v. Georgetown (1872) 82 U.S. 547, 549 [ 21 L.Ed. 231 ] [quoting Dows\\ accord, e.g., State Railroad Tax Cases (1875) 92 U.S. 575, 613-614 [ 23 L.Ed. 663 ]; Cheatham et al. v. United States (1875) 92 U.S. 85, 89 [ 23 L.Ed. 561 ].) This reasoning was also adopted by the | 1 | 1 |
Taylor v. Secorgreen2 sentences2010There must exist in addition, special circumstances bringing the case under some recognized head of equity jurisdiction, such as that enforcement of the tax would lead to a multiplicity of suits or produce irreparable injury, or where the property is real estate, throw a cloud upon the title of the complainant.’ ” 9 (Hannewinkle v. Georgetown (1872) 82 U.S. 547, 549 [ 21 L.Ed. 231 ] [quoting Dows\\ accord, e.g., State Railroad Tax Cases (1875) 92 U.S. 575, 613-614 [ 23 L.Ed. 663 ]; Cheatham et al. v. United States (1875) 92 U.S. 85, 89 [ 23 L.Ed. 561 ].) This reasoning was also adopted by the 2010There must exist in addition, special circumstances bringing the case under some recognized head of equity jurisdiction, such as that enforcement of the tax would lead to a multiplicity of suits or produce irreparable injury, or where the property is real estate, throw a cloud upon the title of the complainant.’ ” 9 (Hannewinkle v. Georgetown (1872) 82 U.S. 547, 549 [ 21 L.Ed. 231 ] [quoting Dows\\ accord, e.g., State Railroad Tax Cases (1875) 92 U.S. 575, 613-614 [ 23 L.Ed. 663 ]; Cheatham et al. v. United States (1875) 92 U.S. 85, 89 [ 23 L.Ed. 561 ].) This reasoning was also adopted by the | 1 | 1 |
Simonton v. Los Angeles Trust & Savings Bankgreen2 sentences2007We are of the opinion that it is incumbent on the party seeking to overcome the presumption of community property to do no more than to produce such legal evidence as, under all the circumstances of the particular case, would ordinarily produce conviction to an unprejudiced mind, and that in the face of such evidence the naked presumption, unsupported by any testimony, must fall.’ ” (Nickson, at p. 606, quoting Freese , at p. 395; accord, Simonton v. Los Angeles T. & S. Bank (1928) 205 Cal. 252, 258-259 [ 270 P. 672 ].) Thus, Nickson defined “clear and convincing” evidence to mean, simply, a p 2007We are of the opinion that it is incumbent on the party seeking to overcome the presumption of community property to do no more than to produce such legal evidence as, under all the circumstances of the particular case, would ordinarily produce conviction to an unprejudiced mind, and that in the face of such evidence the naked presumption, unsupported by any testimony, must fall.’ ” (Nickson, at p. 606, quoting Freese , at p. 395; accord, Simonton v. Los Angeles T. & S. Bank (1928) 205 Cal. 252, 258-259 [ 270 P. 672 ].) Thus, Nickson defined “clear and convincing” evidence to mean, simply, a p | 1 | 1 |
Estate of Duncangreen2 sentences1947The rule has been expressed as follows: ‘If, upon an analysis of evidence of substantial character, in the light of established rules, the mind of the trial judge, exercising reasonable discrimination, is satisfied that the naked presumption in favor of community property has been outweighed, then the findings of the trial court must prevail.’ (3 Cal.Jur.Supp. 575, citing Estate of Tompkins, 123 Cal.App. 670 [ 11 P.2d 886 ].)” In Estate of Duncan, 9 Cal.2d 207, 217 [ 70 P.2d 174 ], it is said with respect to a point of this same character: “Upon this appeal, therefore, contestant is confronted 1947The rule has been expressed as follows: ‘If, upon an analysis of evidence of substantial character, in the light of established rules, the mind of the trial judge, exercising reasonable discrimination, is satisfied that the naked presumption in favor of community property has been outweighed, then the findings of the trial court must prevail.’ (3 Cal.Jur.Supp. 575, citing Estate of Tompkins, 123 Cal.App. 670 [ 11 P.2d 886 ].)” In Estate of Duncan, 9 Cal.2d 207, 217 [ 70 P.2d 174 ], it is said with respect to a point of this same character: “Upon this appeal, therefore, contestant is confronted | 1 | 1 |
Hannah v. Steinmangreen2 sentences1928Ed. 589 , see, also, Rose's U. S. Notes], Chief Justice Marshall said: ‘Although we do not find the naked principle that relief may be granted on account of ignorance of law asserted in the books, we find no ease in which it has been decided that a plain and acknowledged mistake in law is beyond the reach of equity.’ ” And in Hannah v. Steinman, 159 Cal. 142, 146 [ 112 Pac. 1094, 1096 ], the court uses this language: “We deem it unimportant whether the alleged mistake in this case be held to be a mistake of fact or one of law. 1928Ed. 589 , see, also, Rose's U. S. Notes], Chief Justice Marshall said: ‘Although we do not find the naked principle that relief may be granted on account of ignorance of law asserted in the books, we find no ease in which it has been decided that a plain and acknowledged mistake in law is beyond the reach of equity.’ ” And in Hannah v. Steinman, 159 Cal. 142, 146 [ 112 Pac. 1094, 1096 ], the court uses this language: “We deem it unimportant whether the alleged mistake in this case be held to be a mistake of fact or one of law. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Tompkins v. Tompkins
green
2 sentences1952The rule has been expressed as follows: ‘If, upon an analysis of evidence of substantial character, in the' light of established rules, the mind of the trial judge, exercising reasonable discrimination, is satisfied that the naked presumption in favor of community property has been outweighed, then the find *100 ings of the trial court must prevail.’ (3 Cal.Jur.Supp. 575, citing Estate of Tompkins, 123 Cal.App. 670 [ 11 P.2d 886 ].) The presumption in favor of community property is disputable and may be controverted by evidence ‘even by an inference tending to prove the contrary intention ’. 1952The rule has been expressed as follows: ‘If, upon an analysis of evidence of substantial character, in the' light of established rules, the mind of the trial judge, exercising reasonable discrimination, is satisfied that the naked presumption in favor of community property has been outweighed, then the find *100 ings of the trial court must prevail.’ (3 Cal.Jur.Supp. 575, citing Estate of Tompkins, 123 Cal.App. 670 [ 11 P.2d 886 ].) The presumption in favor of community property is disputable and may be controverted by evidence ‘even by an inference tending to prove the contrary intention ’. | 5 | 1938–1962 |
In Re Estate of Pepper
green
2 sentences1933(Estate of Jolly, supra; Estate of Rolls, 193 Cal. 594 [ 226 Pac. 608 ].) *548 In Freese v. Hibernia Sav. etc. Soc., 139 Cal. 392 [ 73 Pac. 172, 173 ], speaking of the presumption created by said section 164, the court said: “We are of the opinion that it is incumbent on the party seeking to overcome the presumption of community property to do no more than produce such legal evidence as, under all the circumstances of the particular case, would ordinarily produce conviction in an unprejudiced mind, and that in the face of such evidence, the naked presumption, unsupported by any testimony, must 1933(Estate of Jolly, supra; Estate of Rolls, 193 Cal. 594 [ 226 Pac. 608 ].) *548 In Freese v. Hibernia Sav. etc. Soc., 139 Cal. 392 [ 73 Pac. 172, 173 ], speaking of the presumption created by said section 164, the court said: “We are of the opinion that it is incumbent on the party seeking to overcome the presumption of community property to do no more than produce such legal evidence as, under all the circumstances of the particular case, would ordinarily produce conviction in an unprejudiced mind, and that in the face of such evidence, the naked presumption, unsupported by any testimony, must | 3 | 1921–1933 |
Couts v. Winston
green
2 sentences1921The property is merely considered as the property of the community until the contrary is shown by legal proof, and legal proof would seem to be a preponderance of the testimony under all the facts and circumstances of the particular case. ’ . . . [1] We are of the opinion that it is incumbent on the party seeking to over- . come the presumption of community property to do no more than to produce such legal evidence as, under all the circumstances of the particular case, would ordinarily produce conviction to an unprejudiced mind, and that in the face of such evidence the naked presumption, uns 1921The property is merely considered as the property of the community until the contrary is shown by legal proof, and legal proof would seem to be a preponderance of the testimony under all the facts and circumstances of the particular case. ’ . . . [1] We are of the opinion that it is incumbent on the party seeking to over- . come the presumption of community property to do no more than to produce such legal evidence as, under all the circumstances of the particular case, would ordinarily produce conviction to an unprejudiced mind, and that in the face of such evidence the naked presumption, uns | 3 | 1921–1931 |
Berry v. Berry
green
2 sentences1962Supp. 575, citing Estate of Tompkins, 123 Cal.App. 670 [ 11 P.2d 886 ].) The presumption in favor of community property is disputable and may be controverted by evidence “even by an inference tending to prove the contrary intention.” (Estate of Bryant, 3 Cal.2d 58, 68 [ 43 P.2d 529 ].)’ ” Appellant relies heavily on the rule stated in Berry v. Berry, 117 Cal.App.2d 624 [ 256 P.2d 646 ], and a number of similar cases. 1962Supp. 575, citing Estate of Tompkins, 123 Cal.App. 670 [ 11 P.2d 886 ].) The presumption in favor of community property is disputable and may be controverted by evidence “even by an inference tending to prove the contrary intention.” (Estate of Bryant, 3 Cal.2d 58, 68 [ 43 P.2d 529 ].)’ ” Appellant relies heavily on the rule stated in Berry v. Berry, 117 Cal.App.2d 624 [ 256 P.2d 646 ], and a number of similar cases. | 2 | 1962–1962 |
Steinberger v. Young
green
2 sentences1931(Steinberger v. Young, 175 Cal. 81 [ 165 Pac. 432 ]; Couts v. Winston, 153 Cal. 686 [ 96 Pac. 357 ].) ” This rule finds further support in the case of Estate of Pepper, 158 Cal. 619 [31 L. 1931(Steinberger v. Young, 175 Cal. 81 [ 165 Pac. 432 ]; Couts v. Winston, 153 Cal. 686 [ 96 Pac. 357 ].) ” This rule finds further support in the case of Estate of Pepper, 158 Cal. 619 [31 L. | 2 | 1928–1931 |
Flying Dutchman Park, Inc. v. City & County of San Francisco
green
1 sentence2024“It has long been established that suits to enjoin the collection of taxes may not be maintained even though the imposition of the tax may be ‘illegal and void.’” (Flying Dutchman, supra, 93 Cal.App.4th at p. 1141 ; see Chiatello, supra, 189 Cal.App.4th at pp. 492-493 [historically, “a tax would be enjoined only in very rare instances where more than a naked claim of illegality was raised[, and] ‘“[a] suit in equity will not lie to restrain the collection of a tax on the sole ground that the tax is illegal”’”].) Nor does a petitioner’s alleged inability to pay the assessment and the resulting | 1 | 2024–2024 |
CALIFORNIA LOGISTICS, INC. v. State
green
1 sentence2024(California Logistics, supra, 161 Cal.App.4th at p. 251 ; see Modern Barber Col. v. Cal. Emp. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Estate of Rolls
green
2 sentences1933(Estate of Jolly, supra; Estate of Rolls, 193 Cal. 594 [ 226 Pac. 608 ].) *548 In Freese v. Hibernia Sav. etc. Soc., 139 Cal. 392 [ 73 Pac. 172, 173 ], speaking of the presumption created by said section 164, the court said: “We are of the opinion that it is incumbent on the party seeking to overcome the presumption of community property to do no more than produce such legal evidence as, under all the circumstances of the particular case, would ordinarily produce conviction in an unprejudiced mind, and that in the face of such evidence, the naked presumption, unsupported by any testimony, must 1933(Estate of Jolly, supra; Estate of Rolls, 193 Cal. 594 [ 226 Pac. 608 ].) *548 In Freese v. Hibernia Sav. etc. Soc., 139 Cal. 392 [ 73 Pac. 172, 173 ], speaking of the presumption created by said section 164, the court said: “We are of the opinion that it is incumbent on the party seeking to overcome the presumption of community property to do no more than produce such legal evidence as, under all the circumstances of the particular case, would ordinarily produce conviction in an unprejudiced mind, and that in the face of such evidence, the naked presumption, unsupported by any testimony, must | 1 | 1933–1933 |
Freese v. Hibernia Savings & Loan Society
green
2 sentences1933(Estate of Jolly, supra; Estate of Rolls, 193 Cal. 594 [ 226 Pac. 608 ].) *548 In Freese v. Hibernia Sav. etc. Soc., 139 Cal. 392 [ 73 Pac. 172, 173 ], speaking of the presumption created by said section 164, the court said: “We are of the opinion that it is incumbent on the party seeking to overcome the presumption of community property to do no more than produce such legal evidence as, under all the circumstances of the particular case, would ordinarily produce conviction in an unprejudiced mind, and that in the face of such evidence, the naked presumption, unsupported by any testimony, must 1933(Estate of Jolly, supra; Estate of Rolls, 193 Cal. 594 [ 226 Pac. 608 ].) *548 In Freese v. Hibernia Sav. etc. Soc., 139 Cal. 392 [ 73 Pac. 172, 173 ], speaking of the presumption created by said section 164, the court said: “We are of the opinion that it is incumbent on the party seeking to overcome the presumption of community property to do no more than produce such legal evidence as, under all the circumstances of the particular case, would ordinarily produce conviction in an unprejudiced mind, and that in the face of such evidence, the naked presumption, unsupported by any testimony, must | 1 | 1933–1933 |
Denigan v. San Francisco Savings Union
green
2 sentences1932That a presumption declared by law has its place in such a dispute was acknowledged by this court in Denigan v. San Francisco Savings Union, 127 Cal. 142 (147) [ 59 Pac. 390 , 78 Am. 1932That a presumption declared by law has its place in such a dispute was acknowledged by this court in Denigan v. San Francisco Savings Union, 127 Cal. 142 (147) [ 59 Pac. 390 , 78 Am. | 1 | 1932–1932 |
Mitchell v. Mitchell
green
2 sentences1909In considering whether or not such a degree of proof has been attained, we have the right to consider such presumptions and inferences as are authorized by the law of evidence.” To the same effect see Neher v. Armijo, 9 N. M. 325, 54 Pac. 236 ; Mitchell v. Mitchell, 80 Tex. 101 , 15 S. W. 705 . 1909In considering whether or not such a degree of proof has been attained, we have the right to consider such presumptions and inferences as are authorized by the law of evidence.” To the same effect see Neher v. Armijo, 9 N. M. 325, 54 Pac. 236 ; Mitchell v. Mitchell, 80 Tex. 101 , 15 S. W. 705 . | 1 | 1909–1909 |
Hunt v. Rousmanier's Administrators
green
1 sentence1900In Hunt v. Rousmanier, 8 Wheat. 174, 315 , Chief Justice Marshall said: “Although we do not find the naked principle that relief may be granted on account of ignorance of law asserted in the books, we find no case in which it has been decided that a plain and acknowledged mistake in law is beyond the reach of equity.” In view of our conclusions hereinbefore stated, it is not necessary to consider the question of inadequacy of the price paid for the property by the defendant, further than to say that the inadequacy here alleged, conceding that it was not so gross as to constitute a ground for v | 1 | 1900–1900 |
People v. Houghtaling
green
1 sentence1866The cases of the People v. Houghtaling, 7 Cal. 348 , Gunter v. Janes, 9 Cal. 643 , and Wells, Fargo & Co. v. Robinson, 13 Cal. 133 , are, as we conceive, in no respect at war with the foregoing views, but on the contrary in harmony therewith. | 1 | 1866–1866 |
Gunter v. Janes
green
1 sentence1866The cases of the People v. Houghtaling, 7 Cal. 348 , Gunter v. Janes, 9 Cal. 643 , and Wells, Fargo & Co. v. Robinson, 13 Cal. 133 , are, as we conceive, in no respect at war with the foregoing views, but on the contrary in harmony therewith. | 1 | 1866–1866 |
Wells, Fargo & Co. v. Robinson
green
1 sentence1866The cases of the People v. Houghtaling, 7 Cal. 348 , Gunter v. Janes, 9 Cal. 643 , and Wells, Fargo & Co. v. Robinson, 13 Cal. 133 , are, as we conceive, in no respect at war with the foregoing views, but on the contrary in harmony therewith. | 1 | 1866–1866 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.