extraordinary factors in California

1978(See In re Sturm (1974) 11 Cal.3d 258, 265-270 [ 113 Cal.Rptr. 361 , 521 P.2d 97 ]; Way v. Superior Court [1977] 74 Cal.App.3d 165, 172-173 .)” (At pp. 784-785.) Applying these principles to the facts of this case, it is manifest that the CRB acted well within its discretion.

1978(See In re Sturm (1974) 11 Cal.3d 258, 265-270 [ 113 Cal.Rptr. 361 , 521 P.2d 97 ]; Way v. Superior Court [1977] 74 Cal.App.3d 165, 172-173 .)” (At pp. 784-785.) Applying these principles to the facts of this case, it is manifest that the CRB acted well within its discretion.

2015Code, § 1717 attorney fees as costs]; Robertson v. Rodriguez (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 347, 360 [jurisdiction to rule on motion for statutory attorney fees as costs]; Carpenter v. Jack in the Box Corp. (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 454, 461 [same].) As for the contention that the court sua sponte awarded attorney fees in violation of Hixon’s due process rights after the Zipperts’ counsel filed a purportedly unsolicited supplemental declaration, we have already addressed this extraordinary claim.

2015Code, § 1717 attorney fees as costs]; Robertson v. Rodriguez (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 347, 360 [jurisdiction to rule on motion for statutory attorney fees as costs]; Carpenter v. Jack in the Box Corp. (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 454, 461 [same].) As for the contention that the court sua sponte awarded attorney fees in violation of Hixon’s due process rights after the Zipperts’ counsel filed a purportedly unsolicited supplemental declaration, we have already addressed this extraordinary claim.

1978“The statute appears to require that such a longer term be justified on the basis of certain objective facts, viz. (1) the number of crimes of which the prisoner was convicted; (2) the number of prior convictions; (3) the fact that the prisoner was armed; or (4) that he used a deadly weapon; or (5) that he inflicted great bodily harm on the victim; this is further implied by the due process guarantees written into the law, including an inmates’ right to counsel and to be ‘informed in writing of the extraordinary factors specifically considered determinative and on what basis the release date h

1978“The statute appears to require that such a longer term be justified on the basis of certain objective facts, viz. (1) the number of crimes of which the prisoner was convicted; (2) the number of prior convictions; (3) the fact that the prisoner was armed; or (4) that he used a deadly weapon; or (5) that he inflicted great bodily harm on the victim; this is further implied by the due process guarantees written into the law, including an inmates’ right to counsel and to be ‘informed in writing of the extraordinary factors specifically considered determinative and on what basis the release date h

1976Appeals Bd. (1972) 8 Cal.3d 150, 157 [ 104 Cal.Rptr. 456 , 501 P.2d 1176 ].) An injury incurred during such travel is compensable, however, in “special” situations “in which the employer, because of benefit to himself, places an extraordinary requirement upon the employee, thereby re-establishing the employment relationship in the case of transit,- and imposing liability on the employer in the case of the employee’s injury.” ( 8 Cal.3d at p. 159 .) [] At the time of the accident, petitioner was carrying report cards, papers, books, art activities material, ánd sewing thread spools in her car.

1976Appeals Bd. (1972) 8 Cal.3d 150, 157 [ 104 Cal.Rptr. 456 , 501 P.2d 1176 ].) An injury incurred during such travel is compensable, however, in “special” situations “in which the employer, because of benefit to himself, places an extraordinary requirement upon the employee, thereby re-establishing the employment relationship in the case of transit,- and imposing liability on the employer in the case of the employee’s injury.” ( 8 Cal.3d at p. 159 .) [] At the time of the accident, petitioner was carrying report cards, papers, books, art activities material, ánd sewing thread spools in her car.