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 1988–2023 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 |
|---|---|---|
People v. JTH Tax, Inc.green1 sentence2023(See People v. JTH Tax, Inc. (2013) 212 Cal.App.4th 1219, 1237 [“[w]hen a trial court states multiple grounds for its ruling,” the appellant must address each of them “because ‘one good reason is sufficient to sustain the order from which the appeal was taken’”].) Nor does she explain how she 9 Militello, Hosie and Hosie Rice filed timely notices of 6 appeal. | 1 | 1 |
Matthews v. Superior Courtgreen2 sentences1999For purposes of this case, therefore, it is established that Lawrence's conduct created a hostile or abusive work environment for plaintiffs on the basis of race, and that Avis properly was held liable for knowingly failing to prevent this misconduct by Lawrence. [3] (See Matthews v. Superior Court (1995) 34 Cal.App.4th 598, 603-604 , 40 Cal.Rptr.2d 350 ; Page v. Superior Court (1995) 31 Cal.App.4th 1206, 1210 , 37 Cal.Rptr.2d 529 .) III Avis and Lawrence challenge only that portion of the judgment awarding injunctive relief. 1999For purposes of this case, therefore, it is established that Lawrence's conduct created a hostile or abusive work environment for plaintiffs on the basis of race, and that Avis properly was held liable for knowingly failing to prevent this misconduct by Lawrence. [3] (See Matthews v. Superior Court (1995) 34 Cal.App.4th 598, 603-604 , 40 Cal.Rptr.2d 350 ; Page v. Superior Court (1995) 31 Cal.App.4th 1206, 1210 , 37 Cal.Rptr.2d 529 .) III Avis and Lawrence challenge only that portion of the judgment awarding injunctive relief. | 1 | 1 |
Page v. Superior Courtgreen2 sentences1999For purposes of this case, therefore, it is established that Lawrence's conduct created a hostile or abusive work environment for plaintiffs on the basis of race, and that Avis properly was held liable for knowingly failing to prevent this misconduct by Lawrence. [3] (See Matthews v. Superior Court (1995) 34 Cal.App.4th 598, 603-604 , 40 Cal.Rptr.2d 350 ; Page v. Superior Court (1995) 31 Cal.App.4th 1206, 1210 , 37 Cal.Rptr.2d 529 .) III Avis and Lawrence challenge only that portion of the judgment awarding injunctive relief. 1999For purposes of this case, therefore, it is established that Lawrence's conduct created a hostile or abusive work environment for plaintiffs on the basis of race, and that Avis properly was held liable for knowingly failing to prevent this misconduct by Lawrence. [3] (See Matthews v. Superior Court (1995) 34 Cal.App.4th 598, 603-604 , 40 Cal.Rptr.2d 350 ; Page v. Superior Court (1995) 31 Cal.App.4th 1206, 1210 , 37 Cal.Rptr.2d 529 .) III Avis and Lawrence challenge only that portion of the judgment awarding injunctive relief. | 1 | 1 |
Sauer v. General Insurancegreen2 sentences1988Co. (1964) 225 Cal.App.2d 275, 278 [ 37 Cal.Rptr. 303 ].) 2 Insurance Code section 2070 requires that all policies contain certain minimum standard provisions which include, pursuant to section 2071, that “No suit or action on this policy for the recovery of any claim shall be sustainable in any court of law or equity unless all the requirements of this policy shall have been complied with, and unless commenced within 12 months next after inception of the loss.” Lawrence’s policy contained this provision, worded exactly as noted above and as stated in section 2071. 3 Lawrence’s claim that the 1988Co. (1964) 225 Cal.App.2d 275, 278 [ 37 Cal.Rptr. 303 ].) 2 Insurance Code section 2070 requires that all policies contain certain minimum standard provisions which include, pursuant to section 2071, that “No suit or action on this policy for the recovery of any claim shall be sustainable in any court of law or equity unless all the requirements of this policy shall have been complied with, and unless commenced within 12 months next after inception of the loss.” Lawrence’s policy contained this provision, worded exactly as noted above and as stated in section 2071. 3 Lawrence’s claim that the | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Lawrence
green
2 sentences2016Nor can it be said that defendant’s crimes were committed simultaneously (cf. Deloza, supra, 18 Cal.4th 585 ) or through the same criminal act directed against multiple victims (cf. Hendrix, supra, 16 Cal.4th 508 ).” ( Lawrence, supra, 24 Cal.4th 219 at p. 228 .) The Supreme Court next considered the phrase “same set of operative facts” and concluded the phrase refers to two crimes that share common acts or common criminal conduct. ( Lawrence, supra, 24 Cal.4th 219 at p. 233 .) It then rejected Lawrence’s claim that his two felony convictions arose from the same set of operative facts. 2016Nor can it be said that defendant’s crimes were committed simultaneously (cf. Deloza, supra, 18 Cal.4th 585 ) or through the same criminal act directed against multiple victims (cf. Hendrix, supra, 16 Cal.4th 508 ).” ( Lawrence, supra, 24 Cal.4th 219 at p. 228 .) The Supreme Court next considered the phrase “same set of operative facts” and concluded the phrase refers to two crimes that share common acts or common criminal conduct. ( Lawrence, supra, 24 Cal.4th 219 at p. 233 .) It then rejected Lawrence’s claim that his two felony convictions arose from the same set of operative facts. | 2 | 2013–2016 |
People v. Hendrix
green
2 sentences2016Nor can it be said that defendant’s crimes were committed simultaneously (cf. Deloza, supra, 18 Cal.4th 585 ) or through the same criminal act directed against multiple victims (cf. Hendrix, supra, 16 Cal.4th 508 ).” ( Lawrence, supra, 24 Cal.4th 219 at p. 228 .) The Supreme Court next considered the phrase “same set of operative facts” and concluded the phrase refers to two crimes that share common acts or common criminal conduct. ( Lawrence, supra, 24 Cal.4th 219 at p. 233 .) It then rejected Lawrence’s claim that his two felony convictions arose from the same set of operative facts. 2016Nor can it be said that defendant’s crimes were committed simultaneously (cf. Deloza, supra, 18 Cal.4th 585 ) or through the same criminal act directed against multiple victims (cf. Hendrix, supra, 16 Cal.4th 508 ).” ( Lawrence, supra, 24 Cal.4th 219 at p. 228 .) The Supreme Court next considered the phrase “same set of operative facts” and concluded the phrase refers to two crimes that share common acts or common criminal conduct. ( Lawrence, supra, 24 Cal.4th 219 at p. 233 .) It then rejected Lawrence’s claim that his two felony convictions arose from the same set of operative facts. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
People v. Deloza
green
2 sentences2016Nor can it be said that defendant’s crimes were committed simultaneously (cf. Deloza, supra, 18 Cal.4th 585 ) or through the same criminal act directed against multiple victims (cf. Hendrix, supra, 16 Cal.4th 508 ).” ( Lawrence, supra, 24 Cal.4th 219 at p. 228 .) The Supreme Court next considered the phrase “same set of operative facts” and concluded the phrase refers to two crimes that share common acts or common criminal conduct. ( Lawrence, supra, 24 Cal.4th 219 at p. 233 .) It then rejected Lawrence’s claim that his two felony convictions arose from the same set of operative facts. 2016Nor can it be said that defendant’s crimes were committed simultaneously (cf. Deloza, supra, 18 Cal.4th 585 ) or through the same criminal act directed against multiple victims (cf. Hendrix, supra, 16 Cal.4th 508 ).” ( Lawrence, supra, 24 Cal.4th 219 at p. 228 .) The Supreme Court next considered the phrase “same set of operative facts” and concluded the phrase refers to two crimes that share common acts or common criminal conduct. ( Lawrence, supra, 24 Cal.4th 219 at p. 233 .) It then rejected Lawrence’s claim that his two felony convictions arose from the same set of operative facts. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Lawrence v. Western Mutual Insurance
green
1 sentence1989(Lawrence, supra, 204 Cal.App.3d at p. 572 .) Nor was the period tolled because of Lawrence’s claim that the engineering report he received was technical and unintelligible to him. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
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.