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.
12 California opinions name it 2 courts 1958–2025 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Santa Barbara County Child Welfare Services v. Jasmin R.green1 sentence2025True, the court observed the situation was also “changing” in that Kelly was continuing to make progress: “Even if [Kelly] had met her burden on the first prong of showing a fully changed rather than what I believe I see here which are changing circumstances that remain in progress and remain changing, especially as I said it does appear in part that the birth of the child, the youngest child, may also be further motivating mother, which is great, but I don’t believe that that shows a fully changed circumstance here.”4 But as discussed, 4 This part of the court’s articulation of the standard, | 1 | 1 |
Conservatorship of Johnsongreen1 sentence2022Substantial evidence review accordingly applies here. 4 (San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Bd. v. Handlery Hotel, Inc. (1999) 73 Cal.App.4th 517, 528 [review of motion for judgment]; Conservatorship of Johnson (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 693, 697 [review of rehearing petition contesting conservatorship].) 2. | 1 | 1 |
San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board v. Handlery Hotel, Inc.green1 sentence2022Substantial evidence review accordingly applies here. 4 (San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Bd. v. Handlery Hotel, Inc. (1999) 73 Cal.App.4th 517, 528 [review of motion for judgment]; Conservatorship of Johnson (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 693, 697 [review of rehearing petition contesting conservatorship].) 2. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Roldangreen2 sentences2014(People v. Roldan (2005) 35 Cal.4th 646, 682 [ 27 Cal.Rptr.3d 360 , 110 P.3d 289 ] [“counsel’s decision to contact defendant’s family over his express wishes was a tactical decision counsel was entitled to make”], disapproved on another ground in Doolin, supra, 45 Cal.4th at p. 421, fn. 22 .) This case is distinguishable from Dent, supra, 30 Cal.4th 213 , upon which defendant relies. 2014(People v. Roldan (2005) 35 Cal.4th 646, 682 [ 27 Cal.Rptr.3d 360 , 110 P.3d 289 ] [“counsel’s decision to contact defendant’s family over his express wishes was a tactical decision counsel was entitled to make”], disapproved on another ground in Doolin, supra, 45 Cal.4th at p. 421, fn. 22 .) This case is distinguishable from Dent, supra, 30 Cal.4th 213 , upon which defendant relies. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Doolingreen1 sentence2014(People v. Roldan (2005) 35 Cal.4th 646, 682 [ 27 Cal.Rptr.3d 360 , 110 P.3d 289 ] [“counsel’s decision to contact defendant’s family over his express wishes was a tactical decision counsel was entitled to make”], disapproved on another ground in Doolin, supra, 45 Cal.4th at p. 421, fn. 22 .) This case is distinguishable from Dent, supra, 30 Cal.4th 213 , upon which defendant relies. | 1 | 1 |
Heiser v. Superior Courtgreen2 sentences1988(See Heiser v. Superior Court (1979) 88 Cal. App.3d 276, 279 [ 151 Cal. Rptr. 745 ].) However, "any right to a jury trial ... is only a right to submit to a jury issues of fact which are triable. 1988(See Heiser v. Superior Court (1979) 88 Cal. App.3d 276, 279 [ 151 Cal. Rptr. 745 ].) However, "any right to a jury trial ... is only a right to submit to a jury issues of fact which are triable. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Politegreen2 sentences1974We disagree. (10) Counsel's summation to the jury must be based upon facts shown by the evidence or known judicially. ( People v. Evans, 39 Cal.2d 242, 251 [ 246 P.2d 636 ].) Counsel may refer the jury to nonevidentiary matters of common knowledge, or to illustrations drawn from common experience, history, or literature ( People v. Love, 56 Cal.2d 720, 730 [ 16 Cal. Rptr. 777 , 366 P.2d 33 ]), but he may not dwell on the particular facts of unrelated, unsubstantiated cases. (9b) The court here properly permitted defense counsel to draw on common experience for the general notion that children 1974We disagree. (10) Counsel's summation to the jury must be based upon facts shown by the evidence or known judicially. ( People v. Evans, 39 Cal.2d 242, 251 [ 246 P.2d 636 ].) Counsel may refer the jury to nonevidentiary matters of common knowledge, or to illustrations drawn from common experience, history, or literature ( People v. Love, 56 Cal.2d 720, 730 [ 16 Cal. Rptr. 777 , 366 P.2d 33 ]), but he may not dwell on the particular facts of unrelated, unsubstantiated cases. (9b) The court here properly permitted defense counsel to draw on common experience for the general notion that children | 1 | 1 |
People v. Lovegreen2 sentences1974We disagree. (10) Counsel's summation to the jury must be based upon facts shown by the evidence or known judicially. ( People v. Evans, 39 Cal.2d 242, 251 [ 246 P.2d 636 ].) Counsel may refer the jury to nonevidentiary matters of common knowledge, or to illustrations drawn from common experience, history, or literature ( People v. Love, 56 Cal.2d 720, 730 [ 16 Cal. Rptr. 777 , 366 P.2d 33 ]), but he may not dwell on the particular facts of unrelated, unsubstantiated cases. (9b) The court here properly permitted defense counsel to draw on common experience for the general notion that children 1974We disagree. (10) Counsel's summation to the jury must be based upon facts shown by the evidence or known judicially. ( People v. Evans, 39 Cal.2d 242, 251 [ 246 P.2d 636 ].) Counsel may refer the jury to nonevidentiary matters of common knowledge, or to illustrations drawn from common experience, history, or literature ( People v. Love, 56 Cal.2d 720, 730 [ 16 Cal. Rptr. 777 , 366 P.2d 33 ]), but he may not dwell on the particular facts of unrelated, unsubstantiated cases. (9b) The court here properly permitted defense counsel to draw on common experience for the general notion that children | 1 | 1 |
People v. Evansgreen2 sentences1974We disagree. (10) Counsel's summation to the jury must be based upon facts shown by the evidence or known judicially. ( People v. Evans, 39 Cal.2d 242, 251 [ 246 P.2d 636 ].) Counsel may refer the jury to nonevidentiary matters of common knowledge, or to illustrations drawn from common experience, history, or literature ( People v. Love, 56 Cal.2d 720, 730 [ 16 Cal. Rptr. 777 , 366 P.2d 33 ]), but he may not dwell on the particular facts of unrelated, unsubstantiated cases. (9b) The court here properly permitted defense counsel to draw on common experience for the general notion that children 1974We disagree. (10) Counsel's summation to the jury must be based upon facts shown by the evidence or known judicially. ( People v. Evans, 39 Cal.2d 242, 251 [ 246 P.2d 636 ].) Counsel may refer the jury to nonevidentiary matters of common knowledge, or to illustrations drawn from common experience, history, or literature ( People v. Love, 56 Cal.2d 720, 730 [ 16 Cal. Rptr. 777 , 366 P.2d 33 ]), but he may not dwell on the particular facts of unrelated, unsubstantiated cases. (9b) The court here properly permitted defense counsel to draw on common experience for the general notion that children | 1 | 1 |
People v. Radovichgreen2 sentences1974We disagree. (10) Counsel's summation to the jury must be based upon facts shown by the evidence or known judicially. ( People v. Evans, 39 Cal.2d 242, 251 [ 246 P.2d 636 ].) Counsel may refer the jury to nonevidentiary matters of common knowledge, or to illustrations drawn from common experience, history, or literature ( People v. Love, 56 Cal.2d 720, 730 [ 16 Cal. Rptr. 777 , 366 P.2d 33 ]), but he may not dwell on the particular facts of unrelated, unsubstantiated cases. (9b) The court here properly permitted defense counsel to draw on common experience for the general notion that children 1974We disagree. (10) Counsel's summation to the jury must be based upon facts shown by the evidence or known judicially. ( People v. Evans, 39 Cal.2d 242, 251 [ 246 P.2d 636 ].) Counsel may refer the jury to nonevidentiary matters of common knowledge, or to illustrations drawn from common experience, history, or literature ( People v. Love, 56 Cal.2d 720, 730 [ 16 Cal. Rptr. 777 , 366 P.2d 33 ]), but he may not dwell on the particular facts of unrelated, unsubstantiated cases. (9b) The court here properly permitted defense counsel to draw on common experience for the general notion that children | 1 | 1 |
People v. Hawthornegreen2 sentences1974We disagree. (10) Counsel's summation to the jury must be based upon facts shown by the evidence or known judicially. ( People v. Evans, 39 Cal.2d 242, 251 [ 246 P.2d 636 ].) Counsel may refer the jury to nonevidentiary matters of common knowledge, or to illustrations drawn from common experience, history, or literature ( People v. Love, 56 Cal.2d 720, 730 [ 16 Cal. Rptr. 777 , 366 P.2d 33 ]), but he may not dwell on the particular facts of unrelated, unsubstantiated cases. (9b) The court here properly permitted defense counsel to draw on common experience for the general notion that children 1974We disagree. (10) Counsel's summation to the jury must be based upon facts shown by the evidence or known judicially. ( People v. Evans, 39 Cal.2d 242, 251 [ 246 P.2d 636 ].) Counsel may refer the jury to nonevidentiary matters of common knowledge, or to illustrations drawn from common experience, history, or literature ( People v. Love, 56 Cal.2d 720, 730 [ 16 Cal. Rptr. 777 , 366 P.2d 33 ]), but he may not dwell on the particular facts of unrelated, unsubstantiated cases. (9b) The court here properly permitted defense counsel to draw on common experience for the general notion that children | 1 | 1 |
People v. Duncangreen1 sentence1961(Cf. People v. Duncan (1960), supra, 53 Cal.2d 803, 812-816 [4] ; People v. Wein (1958) 50 Cal.2d 383, 394 [1] [ 326 P.2d 457 ], and cases there cited.) Here the court properly permitted defense counsel to address the quoted (fn. 1) specific questions to Mrs. Colby. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Weingreen2 sentences1961(Cf. People v. Duncan (1960), supra, 53 Cal.2d 803, 812-816 [4] ; People v. Wein (1958) 50 Cal.2d 383, 394 [1] [ 326 P.2d 457 ], and cases there cited.) Here the court properly permitted defense counsel to address the quoted (fn. 1) specific questions to Mrs. Colby. 1961(Cf. People v. Duncan (1960), supra, 53 Cal.2d 803, 812-816 [4] ; People v. Wein (1958) 50 Cal.2d 383, 394 [1] [ 326 P.2d 457 ], and cases there cited.) Here the court properly permitted defense counsel to address the quoted (fn. 1) specific questions to Mrs. Colby. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Woodsongreen2 sentences1974We disagree. (10) Counsel's summation to the jury must be based upon facts shown by the evidence or known judicially. ( People v. Evans, 39 Cal.2d 242, 251 [ 246 P.2d 636 ].) Counsel may refer the jury to nonevidentiary matters of common knowledge, or to illustrations drawn from common experience, history, or literature ( People v. Love, 56 Cal.2d 720, 730 [ 16 Cal. Rptr. 777 , 366 P.2d 33 ]), but he may not dwell on the particular facts of unrelated, unsubstantiated cases. (9b) The court here properly permitted defense counsel to draw on common experience for the general notion that children 1974We disagree. (10) Counsel's summation to the jury must be based upon facts shown by the evidence or known judicially. ( People v. Evans, 39 Cal.2d 242, 251 [ 246 P.2d 636 ].) Counsel may refer the jury to nonevidentiary matters of common knowledge, or to illustrations drawn from common experience, history, or literature ( People v. Love, 56 Cal.2d 720, 730 [ 16 Cal. Rptr. 777 , 366 P.2d 33 ]), but he may not dwell on the particular facts of unrelated, unsubstantiated cases. (9b) The court here properly permitted defense counsel to draw on common experience for the general notion that children | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Lilienthal & Fowler v. Superior Court
green
1 sentence2014Proc. § 437c, subd.(f)(1), italics added.) The parties' dispute here turns on the meaning of the phrase "cause of action." In Lilienthal & Fowler v. Superior Court (1993) 12 Cal.App.4th 1848 (Lilienthal), a legal malpractice action, the court of appeal held that the trial court properly could rule on a summary adjudication motion directed at the claims pertinent to services rendered on one legal matter, which claims had been combined in the same cause of action with the claims arising from services performed on another legal matter. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
People v. Dent
green
1 sentence2014(People v. Roldan (2005) 35 Cal.4th 646, 682 [ 27 Cal.Rptr.3d 360 , 110 P.3d 289 ] [“counsel’s decision to contact defendant’s family over his express wishes was a tactical decision counsel was entitled to make”], disapproved on another ground in Doolin, supra, 45 Cal.4th at p. 421, fn. 22 .) This case is distinguishable from Dent, supra, 30 Cal.4th 213 , upon which defendant relies. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Margolin v. Shemaria
green
1 sentence2012(Margolin, supra, 85 Cal.App.4th at p. 894 .) The plaintiffs had no “right to insist that [the defendant] violate rule 2-200 (and thereby subject himself to possible disciplinary action by the State Bar of California) so that they can receive the benefit of their bargain with him.” (Ibid.) Nor was “equitable estoppel . . . available to plaintiffs to overcome [the defendant’s] assertion of rule 2-200 as a defense . . . .” (Id. at p. 901.) The plaintiffs’ reliance on the defendant’s promise to obtain the client’s written consent “was not sufficiently reasonable to afford plaintiffs relief from t | 1 | 2012–2012 |
In Re Marriage of Judd
green
1 sentence2001Postmerger employment/rates of pay In applying the time rule, we bear in mind the following: “Where the total number of years served by an employee-spouse is a substantial factor in computing the amount of retirement benefits to be received by that spouse, the community is entitled to have its share based upon the length of service performed on behalf of the community in proportion to the total length of service necessary to earn those benefits.” (In re Marriage of Judd, supra, 68 Cal.App.3d at p. 522 .) Respondent contends the court properly applied this rule to include the seven years of Fed | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Thing v. La Chusa
green
2 sentences1990(See also Thing v. La Chusa (1989) 48 Cal.3d 644 [ 257 Cal.Rptr. 865 , 771 P.2d 814 ]). 1990(See also Thing v. La Chusa (1989) 48 Cal.3d 644 [ 257 Cal.Rptr. 865 , 771 P.2d 814 ]). | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Elder v. Carlisle Insurance
green
1 sentence1990Co., supra, 193 Cal.App.3d at p. 1319 ) The court properly applied this principle by comparing the difference between the fair market value of the property at the time of the filing of the lis pendens with its fair market value at the time of its termination. | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Dillon v. Legg
green
2 sentences1990Nor was this properly a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress of the Dillon v. Legg (1968) 68 Cal.2d 728 [ 69 Cal.Rptr. 72 , 441 P.2d 912 , 29 A.L.R.3d 1316 ] or Molien v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals (1980) 27 Cal.3d 916 [ 167 Cal.Rptr. 831 , 616 P.2d 813 , 16 A.L.R.4th 518 ] varieties. 1990Nor was this properly a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress of the Dillon v. Legg (1968) 68 Cal.2d 728 [ 69 Cal.Rptr. 72 , 441 P.2d 912 , 29 A.L.R.3d 1316 ] or Molien v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals (1980) 27 Cal.3d 916 [ 167 Cal.Rptr. 831 , 616 P.2d 813 , 16 A.L.R.4th 518 ] varieties. | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Molien v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals
green
2 sentences1990Nor was this properly a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress of the Dillon v. Legg (1968) 68 Cal.2d 728 [ 69 Cal.Rptr. 72 , 441 P.2d 912 , 29 A.L.R.3d 1316 ] or Molien v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals (1980) 27 Cal.3d 916 [ 167 Cal.Rptr. 831 , 616 P.2d 813 , 16 A.L.R.4th 518 ] varieties. 1990Nor was this properly a claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress of the Dillon v. Legg (1968) 68 Cal.2d 728 [ 69 Cal.Rptr. 72 , 441 P.2d 912 , 29 A.L.R.3d 1316 ] or Molien v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals (1980) 27 Cal.3d 916 [ 167 Cal.Rptr. 831 , 616 P.2d 813 , 16 A.L.R.4th 518 ] varieties. | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Howard v. Worthington
green
2 sentences1958Howard v. Worthington, 50 Cal.App. 556 [ 195 P. 709 ], is a somewhat similar case. 1958Howard v. Worthington, 50 Cal.App. 556 [ 195 P. 709 ], is a somewhat similar case. | 1 | 1958–1958 |
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.