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.
10 California opinions name it 2 courts 1976–2020 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 |
|---|---|---|
Bockrath v. Aldrich Chemical Co., Inc.green1 sentence2020Under 13 California law, a plaintiff may allege facts “in a conclusory fashion if their knowledge of the precise cause of injury is limited.” (Bockrath v. Aldrich Chemical Co., Inc. (1999) 21 Cal.4th 71, 80 (Bockrath).) That is particularly true where, as here, the “‘defendant has superior knowledge of the facts.’” (Doe v. City of Los Angeles (2007) 42 Cal.4th 531, 549-550 .) “[I]n the context of Class III medical devices,” such as Mentor’s MemoryGel breast implants, “much of the critical information is kept confidential as a matter of federal law.” (Bausch, supra, 630 F.3d at p. 560 .) “An in | 1 | 1 |
Santa Clara Waste Water Co. v. Cnty. of Ventura Envtl. Health Div.green1 sentence2020Rather, this court has “the authority to decide the issue ourselves.” (Santa Clara Waste Water Co. v. County of Ventura Environmental Health Division (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 1082, 1091 (Santa Clara Waste Water Co.).) If the question can be decided “as a matter of law, it would be a waste of judicial resources to remand the matter to the trial court.” (Ibid.) II Negligence Cause of Action Pancho Villa argues that F&R’s cause of action against it for negligence arises from Pancho Villa’s protected speech because the bases for the claim are statements and omissions that Pancho Villa made in its per | 1 | 1 |
Pennsylvania v. Mimmsgreen1 sentence2013(See Pennsylvania v. Mimms (1977) 434 U.S. 106, 108-109 [in evaluating validity of an officer‟s investigative or protective conduct, the “touchstone of our analysis ... is always „the reasonableness in all the circumstances of the particular governmental invasion of a citizen‟s personal security‟”].) Thus, under Brisendine, supra, 13 Cal.3d 528 , at least one of the bases of the rule allowing a minimal 5 patsearch of person about to be transported by police also applies to the search of appellant‟s backpack and any container located therein.2 Thus, the search at issue here did not violate appe | 1 | 1 |
Garrick Development Co. v. Hayward Unified School Districtgreen2 sentences1996Bill No. 1600 (1987-1988 Reg. Sess.) p. 1; see also Garrick Development Co. v. Hayward Unified School Dist. (1992) 3 Cal. App.4th 320 [ 4 Cal. Rptr.2d 897 ].) Plaintiff complied with the requirements of Government Code section 66020 by filing a protest with the city which enumerated all of the bases of his challenge to the recreational and art fees, including his constitutional *865 takings claim. 1996Bill No. 1600 (1987-1988 Reg. Sess.) p. 1; see also Garrick Development Co. v. Hayward Unified School Dist. (1992) 3 Cal. App.4th 320 [ 4 Cal. Rptr.2d 897 ].) Plaintiff complied with the requirements of Government Code section 66020 by filing a protest with the city which enumerated all of the bases of his challenge to the recreational and art fees, including his constitutional *865 takings claim. | 1 | 1 |
Southern California Edison Co. v. Harbor Insurancegreen2 sentences1995Co. (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 747, 759 [ 148 Cal.Rptr. 106 ].) At most, plaintiff’s complaint identifies negligent counseling and sexual misconduct as the bases of her claim. 1995Co. (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 747, 759 [ 148 Cal.Rptr. 106 ].) At most, plaintiff’s complaint identifies negligent counseling and sexual misconduct as the bases of her claim. | 1 | 1 |
De Lancie v. Superior Courtred2 sentences1989(De Lancie v. Superior Court (1982) 31 Cal.3d 865, 870-877 [ 183 Cal.Rptr. 866 , 647 P.2d 142 ].) However, his argument misdirects the analysis by focusing almost exclusively on the alleged infringement rather than considering concurrently the available remedy under relevant United States Supreme Court decisions. 1989(De Lancie v. Superior Court (1982) 31 Cal.3d 865, 870-877 [ 183 Cal.Rptr. 866 , 647 P.2d 142 ].) However, his argument misdirects the analysis by focusing almost exclusively on the alleged infringement rather than considering concurrently the available remedy under relevant United States Supreme Court decisions. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Rath Packing Co.green2 sentences1976(People v. Rath Packing Co. (1974) 44 Cal.App.3d 56, 61-64 [ 118 Cal.Rptr. 438 ].) “Under well established rules governing summary judgment motions, the affidavits of the moving party are to be strictly construed and those of the opponent liberally construed. [Citation.] Nevertheless, a party opposing a motion for summary judgment which is supported by affidavits or declarations sufficient to sustain the motion, has the burden of showing that triable issues of fact exist.” ( Chern, supra, 15 Cal.3d 866, at p. 873 .) On this appeal, plaintiff offers two distinct theories as the bases for her cl 1976(People v. Rath Packing Co. (1974) 44 Cal.App.3d 56, 61-64 [ 118 Cal.Rptr. 438 ].) “Under well established rules governing summary judgment motions, the affidavits of the moving party are to be strictly construed and those of the opponent liberally construed. [Citation.] Nevertheless, a party opposing a motion for summary judgment which is supported by affidavits or declarations sufficient to sustain the motion, has the burden of showing that triable issues of fact exist.” ( Chern, supra, 15 Cal.3d 866, at p. 873 .) On this appeal, plaintiff offers two distinct theories as the bases for her cl | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Bausch v. Stryker Corp.
green
1 sentence2020Under 13 California law, a plaintiff may allege facts “in a conclusory fashion if their knowledge of the precise cause of injury is limited.” (Bockrath v. Aldrich Chemical Co., Inc. (1999) 21 Cal.4th 71, 80 (Bockrath).) That is particularly true where, as here, the “‘defendant has superior knowledge of the facts.’” (Doe v. City of Los Angeles (2007) 42 Cal.4th 531, 549-550 .) “[I]n the context of Class III medical devices,” such as Mentor’s MemoryGel breast implants, “much of the critical information is kept confidential as a matter of federal law.” (Bausch, supra, 630 F.3d at p. 560 .) “An in | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Doe v. City of Los Angeles
green
1 sentence2020Under 13 California law, a plaintiff may allege facts “in a conclusory fashion if their knowledge of the precise cause of injury is limited.” (Bockrath v. Aldrich Chemical Co., Inc. (1999) 21 Cal.4th 71, 80 (Bockrath).) That is particularly true where, as here, the “‘defendant has superior knowledge of the facts.’” (Doe v. City of Los Angeles (2007) 42 Cal.4th 531, 549-550 .) “[I]n the context of Class III medical devices,” such as Mentor’s MemoryGel breast implants, “much of the critical information is kept confidential as a matter of federal law.” (Bausch, supra, 630 F.3d at p. 560 .) “An in | 1 | 2020–2020 |
People v. Brisendine
green
2 sentences2013(See Pennsylvania v. Mimms (1977) 434 U.S. 106, 108-109 [in evaluating validity of an officer‟s investigative or protective conduct, the “touchstone of our analysis ... is always „the reasonableness in all the circumstances of the particular governmental invasion of a citizen‟s personal security‟”].) Thus, under Brisendine, supra, 13 Cal.3d 528 , at least one of the bases of the rule allowing a minimal 5 patsearch of person about to be transported by police also applies to the search of appellant‟s backpack and any container located therein.2 Thus, the search at issue here did not violate appe 2013(See Pennsylvania v. Mimms (1977) 434 U.S. 106, 108-109 [in evaluating validity of an officer‟s investigative or protective conduct, the “touchstone of our analysis ... is always „the reasonableness in all the circumstances of the particular governmental invasion of a citizen‟s personal security‟”].) Thus, under Brisendine, supra, 13 Cal.3d 528 , at least one of the bases of the rule allowing a minimal 5 patsearch of person about to be transported by police also applies to the search of appellant‟s backpack and any container located therein.2 Thus, the search at issue here did not violate appe | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Egan v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance
green
1 sentence2007Co., supra, 24 Cal.3d at p. 819 , italics added.) “An insurance company may not ignore evidence which supports coverage. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
People v. Superior Court (Corona)
green
2 sentences1996On the contrary, in Corona, supra, the Supreme Court indicated that the judge presiding over the second suppression hearing has discretion “to hear the matter fully." ( 30 Cal.3d at p. 202 .) Significantly, the court’s decision to allow such complete reconsideration was “grounded—in part—upon considerations of fundamental fairness.” (Ibid.) The anomaly that results in this case from the majority’s unprecedented limitation on the discretion of the judge presiding at the second suppression hearing is obvious. 1996On the contrary, in Corona, supra, the Supreme Court indicated that the judge presiding over the second suppression hearing has discretion " to hear the matter fully. " ( 30 Cal.3d at p. 202 .) Significantly, the court's decision to allow such complete reconsideration was "grounded — in part — upon considerations of fundamental fairness." ( Ibid. ) The anomaly that results in this case from the majority's unprecedented limitation on the discretion of the judge presiding at the second suppression hearing is obvious. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
People v. Taylor
green
1 sentence1991(People v. Taylor, supra, 222 Cal.App.3d at pp. 623-624.) The court, citing Collins, noted that for there to be joint action the state must have “so far insinuated itself into a position of interdependence with [the private entity] that it must be recognized as a joint participant in the challenged activity .... [Citation.] Joint action therefore requires a substantial degree of cooperative action.” (People v. Taylor, supra, 222 Cal.App.3d at p. 624 , internal quotation marks omitted.) By this definition, there was no state action: the security guards provided the sole impetus for defendant’s | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Chern v. Bank of America
green
1 sentence1976(People v. Rath Packing Co. (1974) 44 Cal.App.3d 56, 61-64 [ 118 Cal.Rptr. 438 ].) “Under well established rules governing summary judgment motions, the affidavits of the moving party are to be strictly construed and those of the opponent liberally construed. [Citation.] Nevertheless, a party opposing a motion for summary judgment which is supported by affidavits or declarations sufficient to sustain the motion, has the burden of showing that triable issues of fact exist.” ( Chern, supra, 15 Cal.3d 866, at p. 873 .) On this appeal, plaintiff offers two distinct theories as the bases for her cl | 1 | 1976–1976 |
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.