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.
8 California opinions name it 2 courts 1998–2025 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Rappenecker v. Sea-Land Service, Inc.green2 sentences1998This court in Rappenecker v. Sea-Land Service, Inc. (1979) 93 Cal.App.3d 256, 266 [ 155 Cal.Rptr. 516 ], concluded that a party’s “mere statements in the points and authorities accompanying its notice of motion to strike cost bill and the declaration of its counsel are insufficient to rebut the prima facie showing [that the costs were necessarily incurred].” In light of appellants’ similar failure to make any showing beyond their own pleadings, it follows that appellants have not sustained their burden of proof to show that the claimed costs were unnecessary. 1998This court in Rappenecker v. Sea-Land Service, Inc. (1979) 93 Cal.App.3d 256, 266 [ 155 Cal.Rptr. 516 ], concluded that a party’s “mere statements in the points and authorities accompanying its notice of motion to strike cost bill and the declaration of its counsel are insufficient to rebut the prima facie showing [that the costs were necessarily incurred].” In light of appellants’ similar failure to make any showing beyond their own pleadings, it follows that appellants have not sustained their burden of proof to show that the claimed costs were unnecessary. | 2 | 2 |
Hernandez v. First Student, Inc.green1 sentence2025(Hernandez v. First Student, Inc., supra, 37 Cal.App.5th at p. 277 [“We may and do ‘disregard conclusory arguments that are not supported by pertinent legal authority or fail to disclose the reasoning by which the appellant reached the conclusions [the appellant] wants us to adopt’ ”].) Appellant therefore fails to establish reversible error here and we conclude appellant has not established any reversible error relating to the trial court’s child support order. | 1 | 1 |
In Re Jesusagreen2 sentences2004Thus, the majority's conclusory analysis is unconvincing. [36] Nor is the majority correct that my construction would produce an "absurd result." (Maj. opn., ante, 10 Cal.Rptr.3d at p. 213, fn. 2 , 85 P.3d at p. 8 .) The majority asserts that, under my conclusion, a juvenile court "must" give notice and order a prisoner's production for " every " hearing in the course of the dependency proceeding. 2004Thus, the majority's conclusory analysis is unconvincing. [36] Nor is the majority correct that my construction would produce an "absurd result." (Maj. opn., ante, 10 Cal.Rptr.3d at p. 213, fn. 2 , 85 P.3d at p. 8 .) The majority asserts that, under my conclusion, a juvenile court "must" give notice and order a prisoner's production for " every " hearing in the course of the dependency proceeding. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re SC
green
2 sentences2023(Jameson v. Desta (2018) 5 Cal.5th 594 , 608–609; accord, Farnum v. Iris Biotechnologies Inc. (2022) 86 Cal.App.5th 602 , 608; Del Real v. City of Riverside (2002) 95 Cal.App.4th 761, 766 .) “To demonstrate error, appellant must present meaningful legal analysis supported by citations to authority and citations to facts in the record that support the claim of error. [Citations.] When a point is asserted without argument and authority for the proposition, ‘it is deemed to be without foundation and requires no discussion by the reviewing court.’ [Citations.] Hence, conclusory claims of error wil 2021(In re S.C., supra, 138 Cal.App.4th at p. 408 .) DISPOSITION Bauman has not satisfied her burden of showing the court erred in granting judgment on the pleadings without leave to amend. | 2 | 2021–2023 |
Jameson v. Desta
green
1 sentence2023(Jameson v. Desta (2018) 5 Cal.5th 594 , 608–609; accord, Farnum v. Iris Biotechnologies Inc. (2022) 86 Cal.App.5th 602 , 608; Del Real v. City of Riverside (2002) 95 Cal.App.4th 761, 766 .) “To demonstrate error, appellant must present meaningful legal analysis supported by citations to authority and citations to facts in the record that support the claim of error. [Citations.] When a point is asserted without argument and authority for the proposition, ‘it is deemed to be without foundation and requires no discussion by the reviewing court.’ [Citations.] Hence, conclusory claims of error wil | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Del Real v. City of Riverside
green
1 sentence2023(Jameson v. Desta (2018) 5 Cal.5th 594 , 608–609; accord, Farnum v. Iris Biotechnologies Inc. (2022) 86 Cal.App.5th 602 , 608; Del Real v. City of Riverside (2002) 95 Cal.App.4th 761, 766 .) “To demonstrate error, appellant must present meaningful legal analysis supported by citations to authority and citations to facts in the record that support the claim of error. [Citations.] When a point is asserted without argument and authority for the proposition, ‘it is deemed to be without foundation and requires no discussion by the reviewing court.’ [Citations.] Hence, conclusory claims of error wil | 1 | 2023–2023 |
In Re Marriage of Falcone & Fyke
green
1 sentence2020(Falcone & Fyke, supra, 164 Cal.App.4th at p. 830 .) We also reject father’s argument that the juvenile court abdicated its authority to define his visitation rights by deferring to the restraining order. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Benach v. County of Los Angeles
green
1 sentence2013(See Benach v. County of Los Angeles, supra, 149 Cal.App.4th at p. 852 ; Cold Creek Compost, Inc. v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. (2007) 156 Cal.App.4th 1469, 1486 .) Moreover, any continuing interest Tenet may have in this case is relevant only to Dr. Mynatt’s concern that he might be biased against Tenet. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Cold Creek Compost, Inc. v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.
green
1 sentence2013(See Benach v. County of Los Angeles, supra, 149 Cal.App.4th at p. 852 ; Cold Creek Compost, Inc. v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. (2007) 156 Cal.App.4th 1469, 1486 .) Moreover, any continuing interest Tenet may have in this case is relevant only to Dr. Mynatt’s concern that he might be biased against Tenet. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
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.