arguable defense in California

2026Evidence of the reasons for counsel’s tactics, and evidence of the standard of legal practice in the community as to a specific tactic, can be presented by declarations or other evidence filed with the [petition for writ of habeas corpus].” (In re Arturo A. (1992) 8 Cal.App.4th 229, 243 .) Here, mother has not shown she can make an arguable claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, as she has not attempted to show that, on the record on appeal before us, there was no satisfactory explanation for her attorney’s actions or inaction of which she complains.

2008(See, e.g., California Teachers' Association v. Livingston Union School District, supra, 219 Cal.App.3d 1503 , 269 Cal.Rptr. 160 ; Wygant v. Victor Valley Joint Union High School Dist. (1985) 168 Cal.App.3d 319 , 214 Cal.Rptr. 205 .) "Mandatory provisions of the Education Code are outside the purview of the board." ( California Teachers' Association v. Livingston Union School District, at p. 1510, 269 Cal.Rptr. 160 .) "Conversely, where there is any claim which `arguably" constitutes an unfair labor practice, the courts have deferred to the administrative tribunal." ( Ibid.) The issue is "whet

2008(See, e.g., California Teachers' Association v. Livingston Union School District, supra, 219 Cal.App.3d 1503 , 269 Cal.Rptr. 160 ; Wygant v. Victor Valley Joint Union High School Dist. (1985) 168 Cal.App.3d 319 , 214 Cal.Rptr. 205 .) "Mandatory provisions of the Education Code are outside the purview of the board." ( California Teachers' Association v. Livingston Union School District, at p. 1510, 269 Cal.Rptr. 160 .) "Conversely, where there is any claim which `arguably" constitutes an unfair labor practice, the courts have deferred to the administrative tribunal." ( Ibid.) The issue is "whet

1991(Hayward Union etc. School Dist. v. Madrid, supra, 234 Cal.App.2d at p. 120 .) F. Trial of the Remaining Issues If the trial court had construed the issue narrowly, simply to eliminate from the actual trial the issue whether it was the failure to file a responsive pleading that resulted in the entry of default, the problem could have been cured by permitting Garcin to try the issue of causation.

1991By failing to meet its initial burden, UCC should have lost the motion even in the absence of any opposition at all. ( Leyva v. Superior Court (1985) 164 Cal. App.3d 462, 469, 475 [ 210 Cal. Rptr. 545 ].) The fact that Garcin chose to explain to the trial court that he did indeed have an arguable defense to the malpractice action is not a reason to impose upon him a burden he did not have. ( Hayward Union etc. School Dist. v. Madrid, supra, 234 Cal. App.2d at p. 120 .) F. TRIAL OF THE REMAINING ISSUES If the trial court had construed the issue narrowly, simply to eliminate from the actual tria

1988The appellate court emphasized the fact that McCammon was challenging negotiated provisions of the bargaining agreement and thus concluded that his claim involved an arguable violation of the union’s duty under the EERA to fairly represent McCammon’s interests. ( 195 Cal.App.3d at p. 665 .) Appellants urge us to follow McCammon since this appeal also involves conduct assertedly justified by a negotiated provision in the teachers’ contract.

1987In In re Antazo (1970) 3 Cal.3d 100 [ 89 Cal. Rptr. 255 , 473 P.2d 999 ], for example, we held it unconstitutional to imprison a person because he could not afford to pay a fine.

1987In In re Antazo (1970) 3 Cal.3d 100 [ 89 Cal. Rptr. 255 , 473 P.2d 999 ], for example, we held it unconstitutional to imprison a person because he could not afford to pay a fine.

1980If, for example, [ ] People v. Caudillo, supra, 21 Cal.3d 562 , had remanded the matter to the trial court for resentencing, there would be an arguable claim that, once the new sentence was imposed and Caudillo remanded to the CRB to serve it, he would be again received.

1980If, for example, [ ] People v. Caudillo, supra, 21 Cal.3d 562 , had remanded the matter to the trial court for resentencing, there would be an arguable claim that, once the new sentence was imposed and Caudillo remanded to the CRB to serve it, he would be again received.

1970Possibly, when the reviewing court is put to the impossible task of predicting how a jury might respond to the defense, reversal should occur where the incompetent advocate precluded inquiry into a defense which is substantial but not necessarily determinative. “. . . whether the demands of due process have been met in a particular case is always ‘a question of judgment and degree’ to be answered in light of all of the circumstances and with a view to ‘fundamental fairness’. . . .” (In re Saunders, supra, 2 Cal.3d at p. 1041 ; see In re Smith, supra, at p. 858, fn. 3.) Here, the crucial qualit