14 California opinions name it 3 courts 1907–2026 5 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 |
|---|---|---|
Lamden v. La Jolla Shores Clubdominium Homeowners Ass'ngreen2 sentences2018The world, as it is, is vexing enough." (True Grit (2010 film).) So here, we need only decide whether the maintenance of the vineyard as a business is in violation of the CC&Rs. *21 Judicial Deference Rule The judicial deference rule applies where an association board "exercises discretion within the scope of its authority under relevant statutes, covenants and restrictions to select among means for discharging an obligation to maintain and repair a development's common areas." ( *582 Lamden v. La Jolla Shores Clubdominium Homeowners Assn. (1999) 21 Cal.4th 249 , 265, 87 Cal.Rptr.2d 237 , 980 2018The world, as it is, is vexing enough." (True Grit (2010 film).) So here, we need only decide whether the maintenance of the vineyard as a business is in violation of the CC&Rs. *21 Judicial Deference Rule The judicial deference rule applies where an association board "exercises discretion within the scope of its authority under relevant statutes, covenants and restrictions to select among means for discharging an obligation to maintain and repair a development's common areas." ( *582 Lamden v. La Jolla Shores Clubdominium Homeowners Assn. (1999) 21 Cal.4th 249 , 265, 87 Cal.Rptr.2d 237 , 980 | 2 | 3 |
Hoover v. Galbraithgreen1 sentence2023(McCready, at p. 483; see ibid. [judgment imposing a lien on the assets and profits of a business did not bar a subsequent action against the judgment debtor for money had and received based on conduct by the judgment debtor in avoiding the lien]; see also Hoover v. Galbraith (1972) 7 Cal.3d 519, 525 [“[a]n action on a judgment . . . may not be commenced until the judgment has become final”].) The Supreme Court’s decision in Hidden v. Jordan, supra, 57 Cal. 184—while not strictly a claim preclusion case—is instructive. | 1 | 1 |
Allied Fire Protection v. Diede Construction Inc.green1 sentence2023(McCready, at p. 483; see ibid. [judgment imposing a lien on the assets and profits of a business did not bar a subsequent action against the judgment debtor for money had and received based on conduct by the judgment debtor in avoiding the lien]; see also Hoover v. Galbraith (1972) 7 Cal.3d 519, 525 [“[a]n action on a judgment . . . may not be commenced until the judgment has become final”].) The Supreme Court’s decision in Hidden v. Jordan, supra, 57 Cal. 184—while not strictly a claim preclusion case—is instructive. | 1 | 1 |
Hidden v. Jordangreen2 sentences2023(McCready, at p. 483; see ibid. [judgment imposing a lien on the assets and profits of a business did not bar a subsequent action against the judgment debtor for money had and received based on conduct by the judgment debtor in avoiding the lien]; see also Hoover v. Galbraith (1972) 7 Cal.3d 519, 525 [“[a]n action on a judgment . . . may not be commenced until the judgment has become final”].) The Supreme Court’s decision in Hidden v. Jordan, supra, 57 Cal. 184—while not strictly a claim preclusion case—is instructive. 2023(McCready, at p. 483; see ibid. [judgment imposing a lien on the assets and profits of a business did not bar a subsequent action against the judgment debtor for money had and received based on conduct by the judgment debtor in avoiding the lien]; see also Hoover v. Galbraith (1972) 7 Cal.3d 519, 525 [“[a]n action on a judgment . . . may not be commenced until the judgment has become final”].) The Supreme Court’s decision in Hidden v. Jordan, supra, 57 Cal. 184—while not strictly a claim preclusion case—is instructive. | 1 | 1 |
Sanchez v. Hillerich & Bradsby Co.green1 sentence2022(See Sanchez v. Hillerich & Bradsby Co. (2002) 104 Cal.App.4th 703, 720 [“[Counsel’s declaration] did not specify that he was the custodian of these exhibits, or that these documents were prepared in the regular course of business, or that he personally prepared these documents or knew of the conditions under which they were prepared so that he could verify their trustworthiness . . . [¶] The trial court correctly ruled that they were inadmissible”].) A trial court’s discretion in admitting or excluding evidence is bounded by the legal principles reflected in the Evidence Code. | 1 | 1 |
Hans Rees' Sons, Inc. v. North Carolina Ex Rel. Maxwellgreen2 sentences1971Thus in cases involving state net income taxes on interstate businesses the high court, grounding its decision upon the due process clause, has struck down taxes which seek to "reach profits which are in no just sense attributable to transactions within [the taxing] jurisdiction" and therefore operate "unreasonably and arbitrarily, in attributing to [the taxing jurisdiction] a percentage of income out of all appropriate proportion to the business transacted" in that jurisdiction. ( Hans Rees' Sons v. North Carolina (1931) 283 U.S. 123, 134, 135 [ 75 L.Ed. 879, 906, 908 , 51 S.Ct. 385 ]; see al 1971Thus in cases involving state net income taxes on interstate businesses the high court, grounding its decision upon the due process clause, has struck down taxes which seek to "reach profits which are in no just sense attributable to transactions within [the taxing] jurisdiction" and therefore operate "unreasonably and arbitrarily, in attributing to [the taxing jurisdiction] a percentage of income out of all appropriate proportion to the business transacted" in that jurisdiction. ( Hans Rees' Sons v. North Carolina (1931) 283 U.S. 123, 134, 135 [ 75 L.Ed. 879, 906, 908 , 51 S.Ct. 385 ]; see al | 1 | 1 |
Butler Bros. v. McColgan, Franchise Tax Commissionergreen2 sentences1971Thus in cases involving state net income taxes on interstate businesses the high court, grounding its decision upon the due process clause, has struck down taxes which seek to "reach profits which are in no just sense attributable to transactions within [the taxing] jurisdiction" and therefore operate "unreasonably and arbitrarily, in attributing to [the taxing jurisdiction] a percentage of income out of all appropriate proportion to the business transacted" in that jurisdiction. ( Hans Rees' Sons v. North Carolina (1931) 283 U.S. 123, 134, 135 [ 75 L.Ed. 879, 906, 908 , 51 S.Ct. 385 ]; see al 1971Thus in cases involving state net income taxes on interstate businesses the high court, grounding its decision upon the due process clause, has struck down taxes which seek to "reach profits which are in no just sense attributable to transactions within [the taxing] jurisdiction" and therefore operate "unreasonably and arbitrarily, in attributing to [the taxing jurisdiction] a percentage of income out of all appropriate proportion to the business transacted" in that jurisdiction. ( Hans Rees' Sons v. North Carolina (1931) 283 U.S. 123, 134, 135 [ 75 L.Ed. 879, 906, 908 , 51 S.Ct. 385 ]; see al | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
McRae v. Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation
green
2 sentences2026(McRae, supra, 142 Cal.App.4th at p. 389 .) Here, Yancey’s claim that CMD “unlawfully” reduced her wages is essentially an allegation that CMD made a business error. 2026(McRae, supra, 142 Cal.App.4th at p. 389 .) Here, Yancey’s claim that CMD “unlawfully” reduced her wages is essentially an allegation that CMD made a business error. | 2 | 2026–2026 |
Diann Grube v. Lau Industries, Inc.
green
2 sentences2026In any event, her assertion is incorrect. ‘“A “pretext for discrimination” means more than an unusual act; it means something worse than a business error; “pretext” means deceit used to cover one’s tracks.’ [Citation.] . . . ‘[T]he overall correctness or desirability of the reasons proffered is not relevant . . . .’ [Citation.]” (Grube v. Lau Industries, Inc. (2001) 257 F.3d 723, 730 .) It is not enough for the plaintiff to show the employer’s reasons were mistaken or unwise, instead the plaintiff “‘“must demonstrate such weaknesses, implausibilities, inconsistencies, incoherencies, or contrad 2026In any event, her assertion is incorrect. ‘“A “pretext for discrimination” means more than an unusual act; it means something worse than a business error; “pretext” means deceit used to cover one’s tracks.’ [Citation.] . . . ‘[T]he overall correctness or desirability of the reasons proffered is not relevant . . . .’ [Citation.]” (Grube v. Lau Industries, Inc. (2001) 257 F.3d 723, 730 .) It is not enough for the plaintiff to show the employer’s reasons were mistaken or unwise, instead the plaintiff “‘“must demonstrate such weaknesses, implausibilities, inconsistencies, incoherencies, or contrad | 2 | 2026–2026 |
Interstate Oil Pipe Line Co. v. Stone
green
2 sentences1950(See Powell, Business Taxes and The Federal Constitution, Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Conference of the National Tax Association (1925) 164, 170-172.) A recent decision of the United States Supreme Court, however, indicates that the court is "concerned with the practical operation of challenged state tax statutes, not with their descriptive labels." (Interstate Oil Pipe Line Co. v. Stone, 337 U.S. 662 [ 69 S.Ct. 1264, 1266 , 93 L.Ed. 1613 ].) That case involved the imposition by the state of Mississippi of a business privilege tax of 2 per cent of the annual gross receipts of "every p 1950(See Powell, Business Taxes and The Federal Constitution, Proceedings of the Eighteenth Annual Conference of the National Tax Association (1925) 164, 170-172.) A recent decision of the United States Supreme Court, however, indicates that the court is "concerned with the practical operation of challenged state tax statutes, not with their descriptive labels." (Interstate Oil Pipe Line Co. v. Stone, 337 U.S. 662 [ 69 S.Ct. 1264, 1266 , 93 L.Ed. 1613 ].) That case involved the imposition by the state of Mississippi of a business privilege tax of 2 per cent of the annual gross receipts of "every p | 2 | 1950–1950 |
In the Matter Of: Grabill Corporation, Debtors-Appellees. Appeal Of: Daniel M. Pelliccioni
green
1 sentence2022In re Grabill Corp. (7th Cir. 1993) 983 F.2d 773 .) 3 28 U.S.C. section 959 codifies two limited exceptions to the Barton doctrine: a business exception and when an officer’s actions exceed the bounds of his or her authority. | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Bamboo Brothers v. Carpenter
green
1 sentence1987(Bamboo Brothers v. Carpenter, supra, 133 Cal.App.3d at p. 124 ; Music Plus Four, Inc. v. Barnet, supra, 114 Cal.App.3d at pp. 122, fn. 3, 123-124; see generally Stats. 1975, ch. 248, p. 641.) 15 The City’s reliance on Bamboo Brothers v. Carpenter, supra, 133 Cal.App.3d at pages 122-125 and Music Plus Four, Inc. v. Barnet, supra, 114 Cal.App.3d at pages 121-125, is misplaced, as each decision preceded the enactment of sections 11364.7 and 11014.5, and were made at a time when no pervasive, comprehensive statutory scheme regulating drug paraphernalia existed. 16 Because of our disposition, we d | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Elsbach v. Mulligan
green
1 sentence1953He had joined issue by his answer, and plaintiff’s counsel, at the very beginning of the trial, made it clear that he was trying the ease on the theory of conversion of the business in violation of a fiduciary relationship, citing Elsbach v. Mulligan, supra, 58 Cal.App.2d 354 , as a leading case of this type. | 1 | 1953–1953 |
Interstate Oil Pipe Line Co. v. Stone
green
2 sentences1950Code, 10109.) Interstate Oil Pipe Line Company, a foreign corporation qualified to do business in Mississippi, owned and operated pipe lines for the transmission of oil from Mississippi oil fields to loading racks within the state for immediate rail transportation interstate. *804 The imposition of the tax was sustained by the Mississippi Supreme Court as a tax "for the privilege of operating the pumping machinery and other pipe line equipment in the transportation of oil in the manner hereinbefore set forth." (Interstate Oil Pipe Line Co. v. Stone, 203 Miss. 715 [ 35 So.2d 73, 75 , 36 So.2d 1 1950Code, 10109.) Interstate Oil Pipe Line Company, a foreign corporation qualified to do business in Mississippi, owned and operated pipe lines for the transmission of oil from Mississippi oil fields to loading racks within the state for immediate rail transportation interstate. *804 The imposition of the tax was sustained by the Mississippi Supreme Court as a tax "for the privilege of operating the pumping machinery and other pipe line equipment in the transportation of oil in the manner hereinbefore set forth." (Interstate Oil Pipe Line Co. v. Stone, 203 Miss. 715 [ 35 So.2d 73, 75 , 36 So.2d 1 | 1 | 1950–1950 |
City of St. Joseph v. Levin
green
1 sentence1907Joseph v. Levin, 128 Mo. 588 , [ 49 Am. | 1 | 1907–1907 |
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.
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.