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.
6 California opinions name it 2 courts 1985–2010 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 |
|---|---|---|
Nelson v. Gauntgreen1 sentence2010It is too little because it is presented as sniping based on bits of evidence, not a *1015 comprehensive analysis of facts and figures needed to mount what constitutes a substantial evidence question (Toigo v. Town of Ross (1998) 70 Cal.App.4th 309, 317 [ 2 Cal.Rptr.2d 649 ]); it is too late because it arises for the first time in a reply brief (Nelson v. Gaunt (1981) 125 Cal.App.3d 623, 641 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 167 ]; Utz v. Aureguy (1952) 109 Cal.App.2d 803, 808 [ 41 P.2d 639 ]). | 1 | 1 |
Toigo v. Town of Rossgreen1 sentence2010It is too little because it is presented as sniping based on bits of evidence, not a *1015 comprehensive analysis of facts and figures needed to mount what constitutes a substantial evidence question (Toigo v. Town of Ross (1998) 70 Cal.App.4th 309, 317 [ 2 Cal.Rptr.2d 649 ]); it is too late because it arises for the first time in a reply brief (Nelson v. Gaunt (1981) 125 Cal.App.3d 623, 641 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 167 ]; Utz v. Aureguy (1952) 109 Cal.App.2d 803, 808 [ 41 P.2d 639 ]). | 1 | 1 |
Utz v. Aureguygreen1 sentence2010It is too little because it is presented as sniping based on bits of evidence, not a *1015 comprehensive analysis of facts and figures needed to mount what constitutes a substantial evidence question (Toigo v. Town of Ross (1998) 70 Cal.App.4th 309, 317 [ 2 Cal.Rptr.2d 649 ]); it is too late because it arises for the first time in a reply brief (Nelson v. Gaunt (1981) 125 Cal.App.3d 623, 641 [ 78 Cal.Rptr. 167 ]; Utz v. Aureguy (1952) 109 Cal.App.2d 803, 808 [ 41 P.2d 639 ]). | 1 | 1 |
Wilder v. Virginia Hospital Assn.green2 sentences2002News, p. 744; see also Wilder v. Virginia Hospital Assn. (1990) 496 U.S. 498, 515, fn. 13 [ 110 S.Ct. 2510, 2520 , 110 L.Ed.2d 455 ]; Folden v. Washington State DSHS (9th Cir. 1992) 981 F.2d 1054 , 1056.) *751 In orders dated January 9, 1997, and February 5, 1998, United States District Court Judge Marilyn Hall Patel denied DHS’s motion for summary judgment, determined that the procedural and substantive requirements of the Boren Amendment apply equally to in-state and out-of-state hospitals and found that DHS failed to meet its procedural requirements in setting reimbursement rates for out-of 2002News, p. 744; see also Wilder v. Virginia Hospital Assn. (1990) 496 U.S. 498, 515, fn. 13 [ 110 S.Ct. 2510, 2520 , 110 L.Ed.2d 455 ]; Folden v. Washington State DSHS (9th Cir. 1992) 981 F.2d 1054 , 1056.) *751 In orders dated January 9, 1997, and February 5, 1998, United States District Court Judge Marilyn Hall Patel denied DHS’s motion for summary judgment, determined that the procedural and substantive requirements of the Boren Amendment apply equally to in-state and out-of-state hospitals and found that DHS failed to meet its procedural requirements in setting reimbursement rates for out-of | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Tidewater Marine Western, Inc. v. Bradshaw
green
2 sentences2003As applied to IHSS payments, respondents' argument is that "the decision not to enforce claims . . . fails to amount to an underground regulation because it does not apply generally [as required under Tidewater Marine Western, Inc. v. Bradshaw, supra, 14 Cal.4th at p. 571 , [ 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 186 , 927 P.2d 296 ]]. 2003As applied to IHSS payments, respondents' argument is that "the decision not to enforce claims . . . fails to amount to an underground regulation because it does not apply generally [as required under Tidewater Marine Western, Inc. v. Bradshaw, supra, 14 Cal.4th at p. 571 , [ 59 Cal.Rptr.2d 186 , 927 P.2d 296 ]]. | 2 | 2003–2003 |
Faragher v. City of Boca Raton
green
1 sentence2003Under these decisions, in an employee's action under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.) (Title VII) seeking damages for workplace sexual harassment not involving a "tangible employment action," such as demotion or termination, [2] an employer may establish a partial or complete defense by proving: "(a) that the employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct promptly any sexually harassing behavior, and (b) that the plaintiff employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer or to a | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth
green
1 sentence2003Under these decisions, in an employee's action under title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.) (Title VII) seeking damages for workplace sexual harassment not involving a "tangible employment action," such as demotion or termination, [2] an employer may establish a partial or complete defense by proving: "(a) that the employer exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct promptly any sexually harassing behavior, and (b) that the plaintiff employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer or to a | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Henry B. Folden v. Washington State Department Of Social And Health Services
green
1 sentence2002News, p. 744; see also Wilder v. Virginia Hospital Assn. (1990) 496 U.S. 498, 515, fn. 13 [ 110 S.Ct. 2510, 2520 , 110 L.Ed.2d 455 ]; Folden v. Washington State DSHS (9th Cir. 1992) 981 F.2d 1054 , 1056.) *751 In orders dated January 9, 1997, and February 5, 1998, United States District Court Judge Marilyn Hall Patel denied DHS’s motion for summary judgment, determined that the procedural and substantive requirements of the Boren Amendment apply equally to in-state and out-of-state hospitals and found that DHS failed to meet its procedural requirements in setting reimbursement rates for out-of | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Northwest Hospital, Inc. v. Hospital Service Corp., Blue Cross Association, Patricia Harris, Secretary of Health and Human Services
green
2 sentences1985The sole authority cited to support this argument is Northwest Hospital, Inc. v. Hospital Service Corp. (7th Cir. 1982) 687 F.2d 985 . 1985The sole authority cited to support this argument is Northwest Hospital, Inc. v. Hospital Service Corp. (7th Cir. 1982) 687 F.2d 985 . | 1 | 1985–1985 |
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.