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.
15 California opinions name it 2 courts 1977–2016 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Southern California Gas Co. v. Public Utilities Commissiongreen2 sentences1989(Southern Cal. Gas Co. v. Public Utilities Com. (1979) 24 Cal.3d 653, 659 [ 156 Cal.Rptr. 733 , 596 P.2d 1149 ].) Resort to such a staff analysis is most appropriate in a case such as this, where, so far as the court is aware, it is the only legislative document available that sheds light on the meaning of the statute. 1989(Southern Cal. Gas Co. v. Public Utilities Com. (1979) 24 Cal.3d 653, 659 [ 156 Cal.Rptr. 733 , 596 P.2d 1149 ].) Resort to such a staff analysis is most appropriate in a case such as this, where, so far as the court is aware, it is the only legislative document available that sheds light on the meaning of the statute. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Douglasgreen2 sentences2007The statute limits review to writ petitions because such procedures are assumed to operate more quickly than an appeal. [Citations.]” (People v. Douglas, supra, 20 Cal.4th 85, 92-93 , fn. omitted.) In Douglas , we quoted a portion of the legislative history of section 1238, subdivision (d) in which a staff analysis of a proposed amendment to the statute explained: “ ‘Appeals generally take at least a year to decide. 2007Is it fair to a defendant to put him or her on probation for a year and then imprison him or her a year or two later if an appeal is lo[s]t, even if he or she has been an exemplary probationer?’ ” (People v. Douglas, supra, 20 Cal.4th at p. 93, fn. 8 .) To serve this purpose, Penal Code section 1238, subdivision (d) prohibits not only appeals from orders granting probation, but also “prohibits appeals that, in substance, attack a probation order, even if the order explicitly appealed from may be characterized as falling within one of the authorizing provisions of subdivision (a). | 1 | 1 |
Metropolitan Water District v. Imperial Irrigation Districtgreen2 sentences2005(Metropolitan Water Dist. v. Imperial Irrigation Dist. (2000) 80 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1425 [ 96 Cal.Rptr.2d 314 ].) Certainly, this staff analysis is sufficient evidence of legislative intent at least to compel that we recognize a latent ambiguity in the phrase “if the provisions of Section 5152 have been met.” As discussed below, we also will conclude that the staff analysis along with other indicators is persuasive evidence that the phrase “if the provisions of Section 5152 have been met” was intended to refer only to the conditions that must be satisfied before an early release is authorized. 2005(Metropolitan Water Dist. v. Imperial Irrigation Dist. (2000) 80 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1425 [ 96 Cal.Rptr.2d 314 ].) Certainly, this staff analysis is sufficient evidence of legislative intent at least to compel that we recognize a latent ambiguity in the phrase “if the provisions of Section 5152 have been met.” As discussed below, we also will conclude that the staff analysis along with other indicators is persuasive evidence that the phrase “if the provisions of Section 5152 have been met” was intended to refer only to the conditions that must be satisfied before an early release is authorized. | 1 | 1 |
Kazensky v. City of Mercedgreen2 sentences1999(See, e.g., Kazensky v. City of Merced (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 44, 73 [ 76 Cal.Rptr.2d 356 ]; Fontana Teachers Assn. v. Fontana Unified School Dist. (1988) 201 Cal.App.3d 1517, 1522 [ 247 Cal.Rptr. 761 ].) As noted, the Commission issued its advisory letter to petitioner on July 14, 1997. 1999(See, e.g., Kazensky v. City of Merced (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 44, 73 [ 76 Cal.Rptr.2d 356 ]; Fontana Teachers Assn. v. Fontana Unified School Dist. (1988) 201 Cal.App.3d 1517, 1522 [ 247 Cal.Rptr. 761 ].) As noted, the Commission issued its advisory letter to petitioner on July 14, 1997. | 1 | 1 |
Fontana Teachers Ass'n v. Fontana Unified School Districtgreen2 sentences1999(See, e.g., Kazensky v. City of Merced (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 44, 73 [ 76 Cal.Rptr.2d 356 ]; Fontana Teachers Assn. v. Fontana Unified School Dist. (1988) 201 Cal.App.3d 1517, 1522 [ 247 Cal.Rptr. 761 ].) As noted, the Commission issued its advisory letter to petitioner on July 14, 1997. 1999(See, e.g., Kazensky v. City of Merced (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 44, 73 [ 76 Cal.Rptr.2d 356 ]; Fontana Teachers Assn. v. Fontana Unified School Dist. (1988) 201 Cal.App.3d 1517, 1522 [ 247 Cal.Rptr. 761 ].) As noted, the Commission issued its advisory letter to petitioner on July 14, 1997. | 1 | 1 |
White v. Davisgreen2 sentences1989(See White v. Davis (1975) 13 Cal.3d 757, 775 [ 120 Cal.Rptr. 94 , 533 P.2d 222 ].) Though the statement of a representative of a special interest group, such as CTLA, is ordinarily an unreliable indication of the purpose of legislation affecting the interests of that group, this is not so where, as here, the statement concedes a purpose inimical to the goals of the interest group. 1989(See White v. Davis (1975) 13 Cal.3d 757, 775 [ 120 Cal.Rptr. 94 , 533 P.2d 222 ].) Though the statement of a representative of a special interest group, such as CTLA, is ordinarily an unreliable indication of the purpose of legislation affecting the interests of that group, this is not so where, as here, the statement concedes a purpose inimical to the goals of the interest group. | 1 | 1 |
Royal Globe Insurance v. Superior Courtred2 sentences1984Co. v. Superior Court (1979) 23 Cal.3d 880, 887 [ 153 Cal.Rptr. 842 , 592 P.2d 329 ].) The staff analysis prepared by the Senate Committee on Local Government states in pertinent part: “The local agency may grant tentative approval for cancellations of a contract if it makes the following findings: 1. the cancellation and alternative uses will not result in a pattern of ‘discontiguous’ development, and 2. the alternative uses are consistent with the general plan in effect on October 1, 1981, or as amended after that date under proceedings which were initiated prior to January 1, 1982.” (Italic 1984Co. v. Superior Court (1979) 23 Cal.3d 880, 887 [ 153 Cal.Rptr. 842 , 592 P.2d 329 ].) The staff analysis prepared by the Senate Committee on Local Government states in pertinent part: “The local agency may grant tentative approval for cancellations of a contract if it makes the following findings: 1. the cancellation and alternative uses will not result in a pattern of ‘discontiguous’ development, and 2. the alternative uses are consistent with the general plan in effect on October 1, 1981, or as amended after that date under proceedings which were initiated prior to January 1, 1982.” (Italic | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
VALLEY ADVOCATES v. City of Fresno
green
1 sentence2016(Valley Advocates, supra. 160 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1072-1074.) That issue is not before us in this case. 18 The Fifth District relied on what the court characterized as “a staff analysis, which appears to be attached to or included in an analysis of Senate Floor Amendments by the Senate Committee on Natural Resources and Wildlife.” (Valley Advocates, supra. 160 Cal.App.4th at p. 1070 .) From this document, the Fifth District concluded that the Legislature had intended for the lead agency to have the discretion to decide that a presumptive or discretionary resource was not significant for CEQA pu | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Delaney v. Superior Court
green
1 sentence2012(Delaney v. Superior Court, supra, 50 Cal.3d at p. 801 .) There is also no evidence that the Board adopted the staff interpretation. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Central Delta Water Agency v. State Water Resources Control Board
green
2 sentences2003The Legislature's deletion of a provision which appeared in an earlier proposed version of a statute constitutes strong evidence that the final statute as enacted should not be construed to incorporate the omitted provision. ( Central Delta Water Agency v. State Water Resources Control Bd. (1993) 17 Cal. App.4th 621, 634 , 21 Cal.Rptr.2d 453 ; People v. Goodloe, supra, 37 Cal.App.4th at p. *483 491, 44 Cal.Rptr.2d 15 .) For this court to adopt the meaning of the statute considered and rejected by the Legislature, in the absence of constitutional infirmity, would contravene fundamental principl 2003The Legislature's deletion of a provision which appeared in an earlier proposed version of a statute constitutes strong evidence that the final statute as enacted should not be construed to incorporate the omitted provision. ( Central Delta Water Agency v. State Water Resources Control Bd. (1993) 17 Cal. App.4th 621, 634 , 21 Cal.Rptr.2d 453 ; People v. Goodloe, supra, 37 Cal.App.4th at p. *483 491, 44 Cal.Rptr.2d 15 .) For this court to adopt the meaning of the statute considered and rejected by the Legislature, in the absence of constitutional infirmity, would contravene fundamental principl | 1 | 2003–2003 |
JOYCE G. v. Superior Court
green
2 sentences2003The Legislature's deletion of a provision which appeared in an earlier proposed version of a statute constitutes strong evidence that the final statute as enacted should not be construed to incorporate the omitted provision. ( Central Delta Water Agency v. State Water Resources Control Bd. (1993) 17 Cal. App.4th 621, 634 , 21 Cal.Rptr.2d 453 ; People v. Goodloe, supra, 37 Cal.App.4th at p. *483 491, 44 Cal.Rptr.2d 15 .) For this court to adopt the meaning of the statute considered and rejected by the Legislature, in the absence of constitutional infirmity, would contravene fundamental principl 2003The Legislature's deletion of a provision which appeared in an earlier proposed version of a statute constitutes strong evidence that the final statute as enacted should not be construed to incorporate the omitted provision. ( Central Delta Water Agency v. State Water Resources Control Bd. (1993) 17 Cal. App.4th 621, 634 , 21 Cal.Rptr.2d 453 ; People v. Goodloe, supra, 37 Cal.App.4th at p. *483 491, 44 Cal.Rptr.2d 15 .) For this court to adopt the meaning of the statute considered and rejected by the Legislature, in the absence of constitutional infirmity, would contravene fundamental principl | 1 | 2003–2003 |
People v. Goodloe
green
1 sentence2003The Legislature's deletion of a provision which appeared in an earlier proposed version of a statute constitutes strong evidence that the final statute as enacted should not be construed to incorporate the omitted provision. ( Central Delta Water Agency v. State Water Resources Control Bd. (1993) 17 Cal. App.4th 621, 634 , 21 Cal.Rptr.2d 453 ; People v. Goodloe, supra, 37 Cal.App.4th at p. *483 491, 44 Cal.Rptr.2d 15 .) For this court to adopt the meaning of the statute considered and rejected by the Legislature, in the absence of constitutional infirmity, would contravene fundamental principl | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Cruger v. Love
green
1 sentence1993If the legislature intended the privilege to extend only to documents created by the board or committee, then surely that is what it would have said.” (Cruger v. Love (Fla. 1992) 599 So.2d 111, 114 .) The Florida court concluded that an interpretation so limiting the privilege “would effectively eliminate the protections granted by the statute.” (Ibid,.) 7 Second, based on the above described statutory and regulatory scheme governing medical review committees and the staff privilege application process, it seems clear to us that applications for staff privileges do indeed “pertain to the commi | 1 | 1993–1993 |
De Luz Homes, Inc. v. County of San Diego
green
1 sentence1987(See De Luz Homes, Inc., supra, 45 Cal.2d at p. 564 .) Southern Pacific was given no notice of the method or methods used by the Board, if any, among the six possibilities, plus their combinations, suggested to Southern Pacific by the staff analysis which accompanied the notice of assessment. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
In Re Franklin
green
2 sentences1986For example, in commenting on the proposed increase of the initial commitment period from 90 days to 180 days, the analysis states: "(a) Constitutionality [¶] The present 90 day hospitalization requirement has been upheld against due process and equal protection as being `reasonably necessary to provide a minimum opportunity for institutional observation and examination regarding the patient's present sanity.' [ In re Franklin (1977) 7 Cal.3d 126 .] Extending the minimum confinement period to 180 days could invite the same attacks. 1986For example, in commenting on the proposed increase of the initial commitment period from 90 days to 180 days, the analysis states: “(a) Constitutionality [¶] The present 90 day hospitalization requirement has been upheld against due process and equal protection as being ‘reasonably necessary to provide a minimum opportunity for institutional observation and examination regarding the patient’s present sanity.’ [In re Franklin (1977) 7 Cal.3d 126 .] Extending the minimum confinement period to 180 days could invite the same attacks. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Miller v. Eisenhower Medical Center
green
1 sentence1985“It cannot be denied that the providing of high quality patient care is, quite properly, the primary concern of all hospital institutions.” (Miller v. Eisenhower Medical Center, supra, 27 Cal.3d at p. 628 .) Appellant relies on Wyatt v. Tahoe Forest Hospital Dist. (1959) 174 Cal.App.2d 709 [ 345 P.2d 93 ] in support of his claim that the bylaw provisions are inadequate. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Wyatt v. Tahoe Forest Hospital District
green
2 sentences1985“It cannot be denied that the providing of high quality patient care is, quite properly, the primary concern of all hospital institutions.” (Miller v. Eisenhower Medical Center, supra, 27 Cal.3d at p. 628 .) Appellant relies on Wyatt v. Tahoe Forest Hospital Dist. (1959) 174 Cal.App.2d 709 [ 345 P.2d 93 ] in support of his claim that the bylaw provisions are inadequate. 1985“It cannot be denied that the providing of high quality patient care is, quite properly, the primary concern of all hospital institutions.” (Miller v. Eisenhower Medical Center, supra, 27 Cal.3d at p. 628 .) Appellant relies on Wyatt v. Tahoe Forest Hospital Dist. (1959) 174 Cal.App.2d 709 [ 345 P.2d 93 ] in support of his claim that the bylaw provisions are inadequate. | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Cleary v. County of Stanislaus
green
1 sentence1982(See Cleary v. County of Stanislaus, supra, 118 Cal.App.3d at p. 362 .) Section 21081 prohibits a public agency from approving or carrying out a project for which an EIR identifying one or more significant effects has been completed without a finding relative to mitigation. 2 (See also Cal. Admin. | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Simon v. Cameron
green
2 sentences1977Code (1970 ed.) § 437.7, pp. 143-144; Simon v. Cameron (C.D.Cal. 1970) 337 F. Supp. 1380, 1381-1382 .) One of the purposes of the Legislature in adopting the comprehensive health planning program "was to stop or retard the increasing costs of medical care in California" and proliferation of superfluous health facilities, beds and services by setting forth in a state plan the projected needs for hospital beds and thereafter enforcing compliance with the plan. ( 57 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 612 , 614 (1974).) The legislative intent is manifested even more clearly in the staff analysis and statement of p 1977Code (1970 ed.) § 437.7, pp. 143-144; Simon v. Cameron (C.D.Cal. 1970) 337 F.Supp. 1380, 1381-1382 .) One of the purposes of the Legislature in adopting the comprehensive health planning program “was to stop or retard the increasing costs of medical care in California” and proliferation of superfluous health facilities, beds and services by setting forth in a state plan the projected needs for hospital beds and thereafter enforcing compliance with the plan. ( 57 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 612 , 614 (1974).) The legislative intent is manifested even more clearly in the staff analysis and statement of pu | 1 | 1977–1977 |
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.