Anthony claim (California) · Go Syfert
← California issues

Anthony claim in California

14 California opinions name it 2 courts 1970–2023 2 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.

Followed or applied (8)

CaseFollowedCited
In Re Marriage of Hainesgreen
calctapp · 1995 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022
1 sentence

2022(In re Marriage of Fossum (2011) 192 Cal.App.4th 336, 343 (Fossum).) As a result, “if an interspousal transaction results in one spouse obtaining an advantage over the other, a rebuttable presumption of undue influence will attach to the transaction.” (Ibid.; see also “In re Marriage of Haines (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 277, 287 .) When the presumption applies, the spouse who was 7 advantaged by the transaction must establish—by a preponderance of the evidence—that the disadvantaged spouse’s action was ‘“freely and voluntarily made, with full knowledge of all the facts, and with a complete understa

11
Fossum v. Fossumgreen
calctapp · 2011 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022
1 sentence

2022(In re Marriage of Fossum (2011) 192 Cal.App.4th 336, 343 (Fossum).) As a result, “if an interspousal transaction results in one spouse obtaining an advantage over the other, a rebuttable presumption of undue influence will attach to the transaction.” (Ibid.; see also “In re Marriage of Haines (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 277, 287 .) When the presumption applies, the spouse who was 7 advantaged by the transaction must establish—by a preponderance of the evidence—that the disadvantaged spouse’s action was ‘“freely and voluntarily made, with full knowledge of all the facts, and with a complete understa

11
United States v. Thomas Luke Guagliardogreen
ca9 · 2002 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
1 sentence

2014(People v. Pirali (2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 1341, 1353 [modifying pornography condition to prohibit defendant “from purchasing or possessing pornography or sexually explicit materials, having been informed by the probation officer that such items are pornographic or sexually explicit”]; People v. Turner (2007) 155 Cal.App.4th 1432, 1436 ; U.S. v. Guagliardo (2002) 278 F.3d 868, 872 [“a probationer cannot reasonably understand what is encompassed by a blanket prohibition on ‘pornography[]’ [because] [t]he term itself is entirely subjective . . . [and] lacks any recognized legal definition”].)3 Ack

11
The People v. Piraligreen
calctapp · 2013 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
1 sentence

2014(People v. Pirali (2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 1341, 1353 [modifying pornography condition to prohibit defendant “from purchasing or possessing pornography or sexually explicit materials, having been informed by the probation officer that such items are pornographic or sexually explicit”]; People v. Turner (2007) 155 Cal.App.4th 1432, 1436 ; U.S. v. Guagliardo (2002) 278 F.3d 868, 872 [“a probationer cannot reasonably understand what is encompassed by a blanket prohibition on ‘pornography[]’ [because] [t]he term itself is entirely subjective . . . [and] lacks any recognized legal definition”].)3 Ack

11
In Re Danielle W.green
calctapp · 1989 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013
1 sentence

2013In making a visitation order, the juvenile court must consider the child's well- being and best interests (In re Julie M. (1999) 69 Cal.App.4th 41, 49-50 ), including "the possibility of adverse psychological consequences" to the child (In re Danielle W. (1989) 207 Cal.App.3d 1227, 1238, 1239 ).

11
Sanabria v. Embreygreen
calctapp · 2001 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
2 sentences

2008(See also Sanabria v. Embrey (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 422, 426 [ 111 Cal.Rptr.2d 837 ] [time provisions relating to the filing of a memorandum of costs are mandatory, but not jurisdictional].) 3 The trial court observed: “Plaintiff filed her motion for expert witness fees well within the 60-day period allowed for the attorney’s fee motion.

2008(See also Sanabria v. Embrey (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 422, 426 [ 111 Cal.Rptr.2d 837 ] [time provisions relating to the filing of a memorandum of costs are mandatory, but not jurisdictional].) 3 The trial court observed: “Plaintiff filed her motion for expert witness fees well within the 60-day period allowed for the attorney’s fee motion.

11
Davis v. KGO-T v. Inc.green
cal · 1998 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
2 sentences

2008The right to recover any of the costs of a civil action “is determined entirely by statute.” (Davis v. KGO-T.V., Inc. (1998) 17 Cal.4th 436, 439 [ 71 Cal.Rptr.2d 452 , 950 R2d 567] (Davis).) The applicable statutory provisions are as follows: —Under Code of Civil Procedure section 1032, a prevailing party is entitled “as a matter of right” to recover costs in any action or proceeding.

2008The right to recover any of the costs of a civil action “is determined entirely by statute.” (Davis v. KGO-T.V., Inc. (1998) 17 Cal.4th 436, 439 [ 71 Cal.Rptr.2d 452 , 950 R2d 567] (Davis).) The applicable statutory provisions are as follows: —Under Code of Civil Procedure section 1032, a prevailing party is entitled “as a matter of right” to recover costs in any action or proceeding.

11
People v. Robargegreen
cal · 1953 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1970–1970
2 sentences

1970(People v. Robarge, 41 Cal.2d 628, 633-634 [ 262 P.2d 14 ].) As far as the assertion of a conflict of interest is concerned—a contention in which Anthony may join at the motion for a new trial—the trial court will not be restricted to the narrow record that is before this court, but may consider affidavits and, *925 in its discretion, oral testimony.

1970(People v. Robarge, 41 Cal.2d 628, 633-634 [ 262 P.2d 14 ].) As far as the assertion of a conflict of interest is concerned—a contention in which Anthony may join at the motion for a new trial—the trial court will not be restricted to the narrow record that is before this court, but may consider affidavits and, *925 in its discretion, oral testimony.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (10)

CaseCitedYears
Paniagua v. ORANGE COUNTY FIRE AUTHORITY green
calctapp · 2007
2 sentences

2020(Paniagua v. Orange County Fire Authority (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 83, 89 .) Anthony could have avoided a finding of invalidity as to Li by serving a section 998 offer solely to Li (even if he had served a separate offer to PV Holding).

2020(Paniagua v. Orange County Fire Authority (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 83, 89 .) Anthony could have avoided a finding of invalidity as to Li by serving a section 998 offer solely to Li (even if he had served a separate offer to PV Holding).

22020–2020
People v. Dement green
cal · 2011
2 sentences

2019The law prohibits them from doing so. ( Dement , supra , 53 Cal.4th at pp. 26-27, 133 Cal.Rptr.3d 496 , 264 P.3d 292 .) The court should have granted Anthony's motion in limine regarding the May 18 interrogation. 2.

2019The law prohibits them from doing so. ( Dement , supra , 53 Cal.4th at pp. 26-27, 133 Cal.Rptr.3d 496 , 264 P.3d 292 .) The court should have granted Anthony's motion in limine regarding the May 18 interrogation. 2.

22019–2019
People v. Prosser green
calctapp · 2007
2 sentences

2023(Kelly, supra, 59 7 Cal.App.5th at p. 1183; Prosser, supra, 157 Cal.App.4th at p. 691 .) Despite having the burden “to demonstrate that the amount of the loss is other than that claimed by the victim” (Prosser, at p. 691), DePolo apparently did not seek out any evidence or request further production of documents that would confirm or contradict Anthony’s claim before the hearing.

2023(Kelly, supra, 59 7 Cal.App.5th at p. 1183; Prosser, supra, 157 Cal.App.4th at p. 691 .) Despite having the burden “to demonstrate that the amount of the loss is other than that claimed by the victim” (Prosser, at p. 691), DePolo apparently did not seek out any evidence or request further production of documents that would confirm or contradict Anthony’s claim before the hearing.

12023–2023
Foss v. Anthony Industries green
calctapp · 1983
1 sentence

2016(Foss, at p. 797.) We reversed. relationship is of an independent contractor status, or that the relationship is not severable or terminable at will by the principal but gives rise to an action for breach of contract." (§ 2750.5.) 14 First, based on both its express language and its legislative history, section 2750.5 applies in tort cases.12 ( Foss, supra, 139 Cal.App.3d at pp. 797-799.) Second — as determinative in the present appeal — because the rebuttable presumption in section 2750.5 is a procedural provision affecting the burden of proof, plaintiff did not have to prove that the contrac

12016–2016
People v. Yarbrough green
calctapp · 2008
1 sentence

2015(See People v. Yarbrough (2008) 169 Cal.App.4th 303, 310 .) Anthony has not cited any authority establishing that, just because Thyler was only six years old at the time of the shooting, she was now unqualified to report what she had seen.

12015–2015
Tennison v. California Victim Compensation & Government Claims Board green
calctapp · 2007
1 sentence

2015(See Tennison, supra, 152 Cal.App.4th at p. 1180 .) While Anthony’s claim was pending before the board, the Legislature adopted a bill to amend the procedures governing section 4900 claims.

12015–2015
People v. Turner green
calctapp · 2007
1 sentence

2014(People v. Pirali (2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 1341, 1353 [modifying pornography condition to prohibit defendant “from purchasing or possessing pornography or sexually explicit materials, having been informed by the probation officer that such items are pornographic or sexually explicit”]; People v. Turner (2007) 155 Cal.App.4th 1432, 1436 ; U.S. v. Guagliardo (2002) 278 F.3d 868, 872 [“a probationer cannot reasonably understand what is encompassed by a blanket prohibition on ‘pornography[]’ [because] [t]he term itself is entirely subjective . . . [and] lacks any recognized legal definition”].)3 Ack

12014–2014
In Re Sheena K. green
cal · 2007
1 sentence

2014(Sheena K., supra, 40 Cal.4th at pp. 888–889 [defendant’s challenge to probation condition as unconstitutionally overbroad and vague not forfeited by failing to object in trial court].) There is authority to support the merits of Anthony’s claim.

12014–2014
In Re Julie M. green
calctapp · 1999
1 sentence

2013In making a visitation order, the juvenile court must consider the child's well- being and best interests (In re Julie M. (1999) 69 Cal.App.4th 41, 49-50 ), including "the possibility of adverse psychological consequences" to the child (In re Danielle W. (1989) 207 Cal.App.3d 1227, 1238, 1239 ).

12013–2013
People v. Collins green
cal · 1960
1 sentence

2013(People v. Collins (1960) 54 Cal.2d 57, 60 .) During 5 closing arguments defense counsel addressed Anthony’s conduct in running from the front yard into the house after he was instructed by officers to get on the ground.1 This clearly demonstrates that the variance did not mislead defense counsel in preparing Anthony’s defense.

12013–2013

Where else courts name it

TN 50 (1997–2017) CA 14 (1970–2023) GA 7 (2009–2022) TX 6 (1990–2023) IL 4 (1987–2026) KS 4 (1995–2026) MA 3 (1991–2008) OH 3 (2013–2016) NE 3 (2022–2026) AR 2 (1979–1999) MS 2 (2002–2023) PA 2 (1992–1996) IN 2 (1995–1997) AL 2 (2018–2018) RI 2 (1994–2006)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check