Among factors in California

10 California opinions name it 2 courts 1971–2016 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.

Followed or applied (5)

Case	Followed	Cited
People v. RUBICSgreen calctapp · 2006 · cited in 2 California opinions naming this issue, 2015–2016 2 sentences 2016(Id. at p. 456.) The Rubics court concluded, “[B]ecause an element of the crime of felony hit and run under section 20001, subdivisions (a) and (b)(2) is a defendant’s involvement in an accident resulting in the injury or death of another, restitution is proper in such a situation because the loss was incurred as a result of the commission of the crime.” (Rubics, at p. 454.) Citing People v. Escobar (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 1504 and People v. Wood (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 862 (Wood), Rubics argued that the “gravamen” of a hit-and-run offense was “ ‘not the initial injury of the victim, but leaving t 2015(Rubics, supra, at p. 454.) Among defendant’s contentions was his argument that because his criminal conduct was leaving the scene of the accident, not causing the accident, restitution for damages from the accident (in the form of the victim’s funeral expenses) was not warranted.	1	2
Owens v. Giannetta-Heinrich Construction Co.green calctapp · 1994 · cited in 2 California opinions naming this issue, 1995–1995 2 sentences 1995Among factors relevant to the analysis are the extent and reasonableness of reliance on the former rule, the purposes to be served by the new rule, and the effect of retroactivity on the administration of justice. [Citations.]” (Owens v. Giannetta-Heinrich Construction Co. (1994) 23 Cal.App.4th 1662, 1669-1670 [ 29 Cal.Rptr.2d 11 ].) We follow the reasoning of the Manthey court in concluding that the section 998 determination should be made before workers’ compensation benefits are deducted from the judgment. 1995Among factors relevant to the analysis are the extent and reasonableness of reliance on the former rule, the purposes to be served by the new rule, and the effect of retroactivity on the administration of justice. [Citations.]” (Owens v. Giannetta-Heinrich Construction Co. (1994) 23 Cal.App.4th 1662, 1669-1670 [ 29 Cal.Rptr.2d 11 ].) We follow the reasoning of the Manthey court in concluding that the section 998 determination should be made before workers’ compensation benefits are deducted from the judgment.	1	2
Cabell v. Lynette G.green calctapp · 1976 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013 1 sentence 2013(See In re Lynette G., supra, 54 Cal.App.3d at p. 1094 ["Among factors which may be considered in making the determination of aiding and abetting are: presence at the scene of the crime, companionship, and conduct before and after the offense. . . . [F]light is one of the factors which is relevant in determining consciousness of guilt." (Italics added.)].) 6 In addition, the record shows that once inside the store during the February 1st incident, James went to the opposite end of the store from Lynch.	1	1
Thor v. Boskagreen calctapp · 1974 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1985–1985 2 sentences 1985Among these are: first, a determination that the evidence is relevant to an issue that is in dispute; second, a consideration of other proof on that issue available to the party which offers the evidence; and, third, that party’s relatively greater need for the evidence if it must carry the burden of proof on the issue to which the evidence relates.” (Thor v. Boska (1974) 38 Cal.App.3d 558, 568, fn. 8 [ 113 Cal.Rptr. 296 ].) The court elaborated on these factors in Burke v. Almaden Vineyards, Inc. (1978) 86 Cal.App.3d 768, 774 [ 150 Cal.Rptr. 419 ]: “Among factors which should be considered ar 1985Among these are: first, a determination that the evidence is relevant to an issue that is in dispute; second, a consideration of other proof on that issue available to the party which offers the evidence; and, third, that party’s relatively greater need for the evidence if it must carry the burden of proof on the issue to which the evidence relates.” (Thor v. Boska (1974) 38 Cal.App.3d 558, 568, fn. 8 [ 113 Cal.Rptr. 296 ].) The court elaborated on these factors in Burke v. Almaden Vineyards, Inc. (1978) 86 Cal.App.3d 768, 774 [ 150 Cal.Rptr. 419 ]: “Among factors which should be considered ar	1	1
Burke v. Almaden Vineyards, Inc.green calctapp · 1978 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1985–1985 2 sentences 1985Among these are: first, a determination that the evidence is relevant to an issue that is in dispute; second, a consideration of other proof on that issue available to the party which offers the evidence; and, third, that party’s relatively greater need for the evidence if it must carry the burden of proof on the issue to which the evidence relates.” (Thor v. Boska (1974) 38 Cal.App.3d 558, 568, fn. 8 [ 113 Cal.Rptr. 296 ].) The court elaborated on these factors in Burke v. Almaden Vineyards, Inc. (1978) 86 Cal.App.3d 768, 774 [ 150 Cal.Rptr. 419 ]: “Among factors which should be considered ar 1985Among these are: first, a determination that the evidence is relevant to an issue that is in dispute; second, a consideration of other proof on that issue available to the party which offers the evidence; and, third, that party’s relatively greater need for the evidence if it must carry the burden of proof on the issue to which the evidence relates.” (Thor v. Boska (1974) 38 Cal.App.3d 558, 568, fn. 8 [ 113 Cal.Rptr. 296 ].) The court elaborated on these factors in Burke v. Almaden Vineyards, Inc. (1978) 86 Cal.App.3d 768, 774 [ 150 Cal.Rptr. 419 ]: “Among factors which should be considered ar	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (6)

Case	Cited	Years
People v. Escobar green calctapp · 1991 2 sentences 2016(Id. at p. 456.) The Rubics court concluded, “[B]ecause an element of the crime of felony hit and run under section 20001, subdivisions (a) and (b)(2) is a defendant’s involvement in an accident resulting in the injury or death of another, restitution is proper in such a situation because the loss was incurred as a result of the commission of the crime.” (Rubics, at p. 454.) Citing People v. Escobar (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 1504 and People v. Wood (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 862 (Wood), Rubics argued that the “gravamen” of a hit-and-run offense was “ ‘not the initial injury of the victim, but leaving t 2015(Id. at p. 456.) The Rubics 4 court concluded, “[B]ecause an element of the crime of felony hit and run under section 20001, subdivisions (a) and (b)(2) is a defendant’s involvement in an accident resulting in the injury or death of another, restitution is proper in such a situation because the loss was incurred as a result of the commission of the crime.” (Rubics, at p. 454.) Citing People v. Escobar (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 1504 and People v. Wood (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 862 , Rubics argued that the “gravamen” of a hit-and-run offense was “ ‘not the initial injury of the victim, but leaving the s	2	2015–2016
People v. Wood green calctapp · 2000 2 sentences 2016(Id. at p. 456.) The Rubics court concluded, “[B]ecause an element of the crime of felony hit and run under section 20001, subdivisions (a) and (b)(2) is a defendant’s involvement in an accident resulting in the injury or death of another, restitution is proper in such a situation because the loss was incurred as a result of the commission of the crime.” (Rubics, at p. 454.) Citing People v. Escobar (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 1504 and People v. Wood (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 862 (Wood), Rubics argued that the “gravamen” of a hit-and-run offense was “ ‘not the initial injury of the victim, but leaving t 2015(Id. at p. 456.) The Rubics 4 court concluded, “[B]ecause an element of the crime of felony hit and run under section 20001, subdivisions (a) and (b)(2) is a defendant’s involvement in an accident resulting in the injury or death of another, restitution is proper in such a situation because the loss was incurred as a result of the commission of the crime.” (Rubics, at p. 454.) Citing People v. Escobar (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 1504 and People v. Wood (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 862 , Rubics argued that the “gravamen” of a hit-and-run offense was “ ‘not the initial injury of the victim, but leaving the s	2	2015–2016
Seymour v. McLaughlin green cal · 1954 2 sentences 1971The first question on appeal is, therefore, whether the compensation fixed by the court for the trustee was a manifest abuse of the broad discretion reposed in the court to determine what amount is "reasonable under the circumstances." (2) Among factors to be considered in determining the compensation allowable to a trustee are (1) the gross income of the trust estate, (2) the success or failure of the administration of the trustee, (3) any unusual skill or experience which the trustee in question may have brought to his work, (4) the fidelity or disloyalty displayed by the trustee, (5) the am 1971The first question on appeal is, therefore, whether the compensation fixed by the court for the trustee was a manifest abuse of the broad discretion reposed in the court to determine what amount is "reasonable under the circumstances." (2) Among factors to be considered in determining the compensation allowable to a trustee are (1) the gross income of the trust estate, (2) the success or failure of the administration of the trustee, (3) any unusual skill or experience which the trustee in question may have brought to his work, (4) the fidelity or disloyalty displayed by the trustee, (5) the am	2	1971–1971
Engle v. Endlich green calctapp · 1992 2 sentences 1995Our conclusion is not altered by Peck/Jones’s reliance on Engle v. Endlich, supra, 9 Cal.App.4th 1152. 1995Our conclusion is not altered by Peck/Jones’s reliance on Engle v. Endlich, supra, 9 Cal.App.4th 1152.	1	1995–1995
City of Torrance v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board green cal · 1982 1 sentence 1986Appeals Bd., supra, 32 Cal.3d at p. 377 .) Among factors to be considered in assessing the severity of the impairment are whether the parties have relied on the preexisting contract right and the extent to which the legislation violates their reasonable expectations.	1	1986–1986
City & County of San Francisco v. Western Air Lines, Inc. green calctapp · 1962 2 sentences 1974Among factors which may make inappropriate a direct action against the promisor are arrangements for governmental control over the litigation and settlement of claims, the likelihood of impairment of service or of excessive financial burden, and the availability of alternatives such as insurance." (Italics supplied.) [4] In contrast to Shell, supra, is City & County of San Francisco v. Western Air Lines, Inc., supra, 204 Cal. App.2d 105 . 1974Among factors which may make inappropriate a direct action against the promisor are arrangements for governmental control over the litigation and settlement of claims, the likelihood of impairment of service or of excessive financial burden, and the availability of alternatives such as insurance.” (Italics supplied.) In contrast to Shell, supra, is City & County of San Francisco v. Western Air Lines, Inc., supra, 204 Cal.App.2d 105 .	1	1974–1974

Where else courts name it

CA 10 (1971–2016) TX 9 (2002–2024) NY 7 (1981–2024) NE 6 (1990–2026) NC 4 (1994–2008) MO 4 (1983–2016) LA 3 (1974–1987) IL 3 (1991–2026) MA 3 (1998–2018) MN 3 (1974–1995) OR 2 (1992–1993) DC 2 (1991–1991) FL 2 (1988–2014)

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