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 1968–2025 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Hughes v. Southern California Rapid Transit Districtgreen2 sentences1986The amendment did nothing to change the statutory language relied on by the Moran court in developing the Moran rule. [See Hughes v. Southern Cal. Rapid Transit Dist., supra, 173 Cal.App.3d at p. 516, fn. 4 .] Without subsequent statutory language to the contrary, the Moran rule remains valid. [Fn. omitted.]” (Id., atp. 517.) C. 1986The amendment did nothing to change the statutory language relied on by the Moran court in developing the Moran rule. [See Hughes v. Southern Cal. Rapid Transit Dist., supra, 173 Cal.App.3d at p. 516, fn. 4 .] Without subsequent statutory language to the contrary, the Moran rule remains valid. [Fn. omitted.]” (Id., atp. 517.) C. | 1 | 2 |
Hirshfield v. Schwartzgreen1 sentence2016(Hirshfield v. Schwartz (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 749, 755, fn. 2 .) 2 manager, and Mendoza reported to Park. | 1 | 1 |
Cannon v. City of Novatogreen2 sentences1985Iacono Structur *517 al Engineer, Inc. v. Rizzo (1984) 162 Cal.App.3d 803 [ 208 Cal.Rptr. 787 ]; Cannon v. City of Novato (1985) 167 Cal.App.3d 216, 223 [ 213 Cal.Rptr. 132 ] (dis. opn. of White, P. J.).) We must also conclude the Moran rule is controlling here. 1985Iacono Structur *517 al Engineer, Inc. v. Rizzo (1984) 162 Cal.App.3d 803 [ 208 Cal.Rptr. 787 ]; Cannon v. City of Novato (1985) 167 Cal.App.3d 216, 223 [ 213 Cal.Rptr. 132 ] (dis. opn. of White, P. J.).) We must also conclude the Moran rule is controlling here. | 1 | 1 |
Lacy v. California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Boardgreen2 sentences1980Appeals Bd. (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 1128, 1135, fn. 2 [ 95 Cal.Rptr. 566 ]), it has been reaffirmed on numerous occasions (e.g., Yakov v. Board of Medical Examiners (1968) 68 Cal.2d 67, 72 [ 64 Cal.Rptr. 785 , 435 P.2d 553 ]; Merrill v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1969) 71 Cal.2d 907, 916 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 89 , 458 P.2d 33 ]; Bixby v. Pierno (1971) 4 Cal.3d 130, 149 [ 93 Cal.Rptr. 234 , 481 P.2d 242 ]; Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn., supra, 11 Cal.3d at p. 46, fn. 18 ; Board of Education v. Jack M. (1977) 19 Cal.3d 691, 697 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 700 , 566 P.2d 602 ]; Pasadena Un 1980Appeals Bd. (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 1128, 1135, fn. 2 [ 95 Cal.Rptr. 566 ]), it has been reaffirmed on numerous occasions (e.g., Yakov v. Board of Medical Examiners (1968) 68 Cal.2d 67, 72 [ 64 Cal.Rptr. 785 , 435 P.2d 553 ]; Merrill v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1969) 71 Cal.2d 907, 916 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 89 , 458 P.2d 33 ]; Bixby v. Pierno (1971) 4 Cal.3d 130, 149 [ 93 Cal.Rptr. 234 , 481 P.2d 242 ]; Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn., supra, 11 Cal.3d at p. 46, fn. 18 ; Board of Education v. Jack M. (1977) 19 Cal.3d 691, 697 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 700 , 566 P.2d 602 ]; Pasadena Un | 1 | 1 |
Board of Education v. Jack M.green2 sentences1980Appeals Bd. (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 1128, 1135, fn. 2 [ 95 Cal.Rptr. 566 ]), it has been reaffirmed on numerous occasions (e.g., Yakov v. Board of Medical Examiners (1968) 68 Cal.2d 67, 72 [ 64 Cal.Rptr. 785 , 435 P.2d 553 ]; Merrill v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1969) 71 Cal.2d 907, 916 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 89 , 458 P.2d 33 ]; Bixby v. Pierno (1971) 4 Cal.3d 130, 149 [ 93 Cal.Rptr. 234 , 481 P.2d 242 ]; Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn., supra, 11 Cal.3d at p. 46, fn. 18 ; Board of Education v. Jack M. (1977) 19 Cal.3d 691, 697 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 700 , 566 P.2d 602 ]; Pasadena Un 1980Appeals Bd. (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 1128, 1135, fn. 2 [ 95 Cal.Rptr. 566 ]), it has been reaffirmed on numerous occasions (e.g., Yakov v. Board of Medical Examiners (1968) 68 Cal.2d 67, 72 [ 64 Cal.Rptr. 785 , 435 P.2d 553 ]; Merrill v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1969) 71 Cal.2d 907, 916 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 89 , 458 P.2d 33 ]; Bixby v. Pierno (1971) 4 Cal.3d 130, 149 [ 93 Cal.Rptr. 234 , 481 P.2d 242 ]; Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn., supra, 11 Cal.3d at p. 46, fn. 18 ; Board of Education v. Jack M. (1977) 19 Cal.3d 691, 697 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 700 , 566 P.2d 602 ]; Pasadena Un | 1 | 1 |
Bixby v. Piernogreen2 sentences1980Appeals Bd. (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 1128, 1135, fn. 2 [ 95 Cal.Rptr. 566 ]), it has been reaffirmed on numerous occasions (e.g., Yakov v. Board of Medical Examiners (1968) 68 Cal.2d 67, 72 [ 64 Cal.Rptr. 785 , 435 P.2d 553 ]; Merrill v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1969) 71 Cal.2d 907, 916 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 89 , 458 P.2d 33 ]; Bixby v. Pierno (1971) 4 Cal.3d 130, 149 [ 93 Cal.Rptr. 234 , 481 P.2d 242 ]; Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn., supra, 11 Cal.3d at p. 46, fn. 18 ; Board of Education v. Jack M. (1977) 19 Cal.3d 691, 697 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 700 , 566 P.2d 602 ]; Pasadena Un 1980Appeals Bd. (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 1128, 1135, fn. 2 [ 95 Cal.Rptr. 566 ]), it has been reaffirmed on numerous occasions (e.g., Yakov v. Board of Medical Examiners (1968) 68 Cal.2d 67, 72 [ 64 Cal.Rptr. 785 , 435 P.2d 553 ]; Merrill v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1969) 71 Cal.2d 907, 916 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 89 , 458 P.2d 33 ]; Bixby v. Pierno (1971) 4 Cal.3d 130, 149 [ 93 Cal.Rptr. 234 , 481 P.2d 242 ]; Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn., supra, 11 Cal.3d at p. 46, fn. 18 ; Board of Education v. Jack M. (1977) 19 Cal.3d 691, 697 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 700 , 566 P.2d 602 ]; Pasadena Un | 1 | 1 |
Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn.green2 sentences1980Appeals Bd. (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 1128, 1135, fn. 2 [ 95 Cal.Rptr. 566 ]), it has been reaffirmed on numerous occasions (e.g., Yakov v. Board of Medical Examiners (1968) 68 Cal.2d 67, 72 [ 64 Cal.Rptr. 785 , 435 P.2d 553 ]; Merrill v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1969) 71 Cal.2d 907, 916 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 89 , 458 P.2d 33 ]; Bixby v. Pierno (1971) 4 Cal.3d 130, 149 [ 93 Cal.Rptr. 234 , 481 P.2d 242 ]; Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn., supra, 11 Cal.3d at p. 46, fn. 18 ; Board of Education v. Jack M. (1977) 19 Cal.3d 691, 697 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 700 , 566 P.2d 602 ]; Pasadena Un 1980Appeals Bd. (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 1128, 1135, fn. 2 [ 95 Cal.Rptr. 566 ]), it has been reaffirmed on numerous occasions (e.g., Yakov v. Board of Medical Examiners (1968) 68 Cal.2d 67, 72 [ 64 Cal.Rptr. 785 , 435 P.2d 553 ]; Merrill v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1969) 71 Cal.2d 907, 916 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 89 , 458 P.2d 33 ]; Bixby v. Pierno (1971) 4 Cal.3d 130, 149 [ 93 Cal.Rptr. 234 , 481 P.2d 242 ]; Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn., supra, 11 Cal.3d at p. 46, fn. 18 ; Board of Education v. Jack M. (1977) 19 Cal.3d 691, 697 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 700 , 566 P.2d 602 ]; Pasadena Un | 1 | 1 |
Merrill v. Department of Motor Vehiclesgreen2 sentences1980Appeals Bd. (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 1128, 1135, fn. 2 [ 95 Cal.Rptr. 566 ]), it has been reaffirmed on numerous occasions (e.g., Yakov v. Board of Medical Examiners (1968) 68 Cal.2d 67, 72 [ 64 Cal.Rptr. 785 , 435 P.2d 553 ]; Merrill v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1969) 71 Cal.2d 907, 916 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 89 , 458 P.2d 33 ]; Bixby v. Pierno (1971) 4 Cal.3d 130, 149 [ 93 Cal.Rptr. 234 , 481 P.2d 242 ]; Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn., supra, 11 Cal.3d at p. 46, fn. 18 ; Board of Education v. Jack M. (1977) 19 Cal.3d 691, 697 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 700 , 566 P.2d 602 ]; Pasadena Un 1980Appeals Bd. (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 1128, 1135, fn. 2 [ 95 Cal.Rptr. 566 ]), it has been reaffirmed on numerous occasions (e.g., Yakov v. Board of Medical Examiners (1968) 68 Cal.2d 67, 72 [ 64 Cal.Rptr. 785 , 435 P.2d 553 ]; Merrill v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1969) 71 Cal.2d 907, 916 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 89 , 458 P.2d 33 ]; Bixby v. Pierno (1971) 4 Cal.3d 130, 149 [ 93 Cal.Rptr. 234 , 481 P.2d 242 ]; Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn., supra, 11 Cal.3d at p. 46, fn. 18 ; Board of Education v. Jack M. (1977) 19 Cal.3d 691, 697 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 700 , 566 P.2d 602 ]; Pasadena Un | 1 | 1 |
Yakov v. Board of Medical Examinersgreen2 sentences1980Appeals Bd. (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 1128, 1135, fn. 2 [ 95 Cal.Rptr. 566 ]), it has been reaffirmed on numerous occasions (e.g., Yakov v. Board of Medical Examiners (1968) 68 Cal.2d 67, 72 [ 64 Cal.Rptr. 785 , 435 P.2d 553 ]; Merrill v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1969) 71 Cal.2d 907, 916 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 89 , 458 P.2d 33 ]; Bixby v. Pierno (1971) 4 Cal.3d 130, 149 [ 93 Cal.Rptr. 234 , 481 P.2d 242 ]; Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn., supra, 11 Cal.3d at p. 46, fn. 18 ; Board of Education v. Jack M. (1977) 19 Cal.3d 691, 697 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 700 , 566 P.2d 602 ]; Pasadena Un 1980Appeals Bd. (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 1128, 1135, fn. 2 [ 95 Cal.Rptr. 566 ]), it has been reaffirmed on numerous occasions (e.g., Yakov v. Board of Medical Examiners (1968) 68 Cal.2d 67, 72 [ 64 Cal.Rptr. 785 , 435 P.2d 553 ]; Merrill v. Department of Motor Vehicles (1969) 71 Cal.2d 907, 916 [ 80 Cal.Rptr. 89 , 458 P.2d 33 ]; Bixby v. Pierno (1971) 4 Cal.3d 130, 149 [ 93 Cal.Rptr. 234 , 481 P.2d 242 ]; Strumsky v. San Diego County Employees Retirement Assn., supra, 11 Cal.3d at p. 46, fn. 18 ; Board of Education v. Jack M. (1977) 19 Cal.3d 691, 697 [ 139 Cal.Rptr. 700 , 566 P.2d 602 ]; Pasadena Un | 1 | 1 |
Crawford v. Southern Pacific Co.green2 sentences1968Co. (1935) 3 Cal.2d 427, 429 [ 45 P.2d 183 ] : “ ‘ “In reviewing the evidence . . . all conflicts must be resolved in favor of the respondent, and all legitimate and reasonable inferences indulged in to uphold the verdict if possible .... 1968Co. (1935) 3 Cal.2d 427, 429 [ 45 P.2d 183 ] : “ ‘ “In reviewing the evidence . . . all conflicts must be resolved in favor of the respondent, and all legitimate and reasonable inferences indulged in to uphold the verdict if possible .... | 1 | 1 |
Southern Pacific Co. v. Pillsburygreen2 sentences1968Co. v. Pillsbury (1915) 170 Cal. 782, 783-784 [ 151 P. 277 , L.R.A. 1916E 916 ] ; Brown, Pact and Law in Judicial Review (1943) 56 Harv.L.Rev. 899, 901; Stern, Review of Findings of Administrators, Judges and Juries: A Comparative Analysis (1944) 58 Harv.L.Rev. 70, 112, 117.) Thus, once the “facts” are established pursuant to the Moran rule, this court must reach an independent decision as to whether Dr. Yakov’s conduct demonstrated moral turpitude. 1968Co. v. Pillsbury (1915) 170 Cal. 782, 783-784 [ 151 P. 277 , L.R.A. 1916E 916 ] ; Brown, Pact and Law in Judicial Review (1943) 56 Harv.L.Rev. 899, 901; Stern, Review of Findings of Administrators, Judges and Juries: A Comparative Analysis (1944) 58 Harv.L.Rev. 70, 112, 117.) Thus, once the “facts” are established pursuant to the Moran rule, this court must reach an independent decision as to whether Dr. Yakov’s conduct demonstrated moral turpitude. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Paul E. Iacono Structural Engineer, Inc. v. Rizzo
green
2 sentences1986Iacono Structural Engineer, Inc. v. Rizzo (1984) 162 Cal.App.3d 803 [ 208 Cal.Rptr. 787 ].) Nonetheless, defendants argue that legislative amendments to section *446 1141.17 3 were intended to supersede the Moran rule. 1986Iacono Structural Engineer, Inc. v. Rizzo (1984) 162 Cal.App.3d 803 [ 208 Cal.Rptr. 787 ].) Nonetheless, defendants argue that legislative amendments to section *446 1141.17 3 were intended to supersede the Moran rule. | 2 | 1985–1986 |
Ward v. Levin
green
2 sentences1986(See, e.g., Ward v. Levin (1984) 161 Cal.App.3d 1026 [208 Cal.Rptr. 312]; Paul E. 1985(Ward v. Levin, supra, 161 Cal.App.3d at p. 1032 .) Because the court below set a trial date of July 9, 1984, the statute was automatically tolled until this date under the Moran rule. | 2 | 1985–1986 |
People v. French
green
1 sentence2025Thus, Moran’s challenge to these components of the sentence is not based on “grounds that arose after entry of the plea and that do not affect the validity of the plea.” (People v. French, supra, 43 Cal.4th at p. 43 .) Moran’s focus on the absence of defense input into the length of the sentence and legality of its components indicates his argument is based on premises that a specific sentence cannot be an integral part of the bargain if there was not a give and take as to its length and components, and that his subjective motivation for agreeing to the sentence proposed is determinative as to | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Martinez v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car Co.
green
2 sentences2006The department, upon receipt of the certificate of ownership or other evidence of title, the license plates, and the fee, shall issue a salvage certificate for the vehicle.” The legal basis for Moran’s claim Esurance wrongly classified his vehicle is dicta in Martinez v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car Co. (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 46 [ 13 Cal.Rptr.3d 857 ]. 2006The department, upon receipt of the certificate of ownership or other evidence of title, the license plates, and the fee, shall issue a salvage certificate for the vehicle.” The legal basis for Moran’s claim Esurance wrongly classified his vehicle is dicta in Martinez v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car Co. (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 46 [ 13 Cal.Rptr.3d 857 ]. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
California Shoppers, Inc. v. Royal Globe Insurance Co.
green
2 sentences1997Co., supra, 175 Cal.App.3d at p. 37 .) As we have noted, the Moran claim—the only claim reported during the policy period—was not based on structural design deficiencies of the building but on expenses Moran had incurred as general contractor in repairing certain cable failures. 1997Co., supra, 175 Cal.App.3d at p. 37 .) As we have noted, the Moran claim—the only claim reported during the policy period—was not based on structural design deficiencies of the building but on expenses Moran had incurred as general contractor in repairing certain cable failures. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Moran v. Superior Court
green
2 sentences1995As discussed above, “[s]ince the trial court alone has the power to order a matter placed upon its trial calendar, section 1141.20 imposes a duty upon the court sua sponte to recalendar the trial ‘in the same place ... it had prior to arbitration.’ ” (Moran, supra, 35 Cal.3d at p. 241 , fn. omitted.) The modification of the Moran rule in part II of this opinion does not alter the existence of the trial court’s statutorily imposed sua sponte duty, but rather recognizes that the existence of such duty does not result in the automatic tolling of the five-year statute. 1995As discussed above, "[s]ince the trial court alone has the power to order a matter placed upon its trial calendar, section 1141.20 imposes a duty upon the court sua sponte to recalendar the trial `in the same place ... it had prior to arbitration.'" ( Moran, supra, 35 Cal.3d at p. 241 , fn. omitted.) The modification of the Moran rule in part II of this opinion does not alter the existence of the trial court's statutorily imposed sua sponte duty, but rather recognizes that the existence of such duty does not result in the automatic tolling of the five-year statute. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Hill v. Bingham
green
2 sentences1986Applicability of Reasonable Diligence Defendants further argue, citing Hill v. Bingham (1986) 181 Cal.App.3d 1 [ 225 Cal.Rptr. 905 ], that, in order for a court’s sua sponte duty to arise to recalendar a matter once a timely request for trial de novo is filed, a plaintiff must still exercise reasonable diligence in bringing his case to trial. 1986Applicability of Reasonable Diligence Defendants further argue, citing Hill v. Bingham (1986) 181 Cal.App.3d 1 [ 225 Cal.Rptr. 905 ], that, in order for a court’s sua sponte duty to arise to recalendar a matter once a timely request for trial de novo is filed, a plaintiff must still exercise reasonable diligence in bringing his case to trial. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Moran v. Board of Medical Examiners
green
2 sentences1968Affirming the judgment of the superior court, this court held that the trial court was “ ‘authorized by law to exercise its independent judgment on the evidence ’ ” and that “ ‘the ultimate power of decision rests with the trial court. ’ ” ( 32 Cal.2d at p. 308 .) Since its inception in 1948, the Moran rule has been consistently applied to describe the scope of review of decisions not only by the Board of Medical Examiners 3 but also by other statewide administrative agencies that are without constitutional authority to exercise judicial powers. 4 As we stated in Moran, supra, 32 Cal.2d 301, 3 1968Affirming the judgment of the superior court, this court held that the trial court was “ ‘authorized by law to exercise its independent judgment on the evidence ’ ” and that “ ‘the ultimate power of decision rests with the trial court. ’ ” ( 32 Cal.2d at p. 308 .) Since its inception in 1948, the Moran rule has been consistently applied to describe the scope of review of decisions not only by the Board of Medical Examiners 3 but also by other statewide administrative agencies that are without constitutional authority to exercise judicial powers. 4 As we stated in Moran, supra, 32 Cal.2d 301, 3 | 1 | 1968–1968 |
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.