6 California opinions name it 2 courts 1897–2016 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 |
|---|---|---|
People v. Coronagreen2 sentences1996(In re Sergio R. (1991) 228 Cal.App.3d 588, 601-602 [ 279 Cal.Rptr. 149 ] [defendant and another fired 12-gauge shotguns into a crowd]; People v. Corona (1989) 213 Cal.App.3d 589, 593-594 [ 261 Cal.Rptr. 765 ] [defendant was one of a group that beat the victim].) This exception applies only when proof of the personally liable defendant is impossible. 1996(In re Sergio R. (1991) 228 Cal.App.3d 588, 601-602 [ 279 Cal.Rptr. 149 ] [defendant and another fired 12-gauge shotguns into a crowd]; People v. Corona (1989) 213 Cal.App.3d 589, 593-594 [ 261 Cal.Rptr. 765 ] [defendant was one of a group that beat the victim].) This exception applies only when proof of the personally liable defendant is impossible. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Sergio R.green2 sentences1996(In re Sergio R. (1991) 228 Cal.App.3d 588, 601-602 [ 279 Cal.Rptr. 149 ] [defendant and another fired 12-gauge shotguns into a crowd]; People v. Corona (1989) 213 Cal.App.3d 589, 593-594 [ 261 Cal.Rptr. 765 ] [defendant was one of a group that beat the victim].) This exception applies only when proof of the personally liable defendant is impossible. 1996(In re Sergio R. (1991) 228 Cal.App.3d 588, 601-602 [ 279 Cal.Rptr. 149 ] [defendant and another fired 12-gauge shotguns into a crowd]; People v. Corona (1989) 213 Cal.App.3d 589, 593-594 [ 261 Cal.Rptr. 765 ] [defendant was one of a group that beat the victim].) This exception applies only when proof of the personally liable defendant is impossible. | 1 | 1 |
Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.green2 sentences1987Serv. (1978) 436 U.S. 658, 701 [ 56 L.Ed.2d 611, 641-642 , 98 S.Ct. 2018 ].) Putting aside questions of immunity of state officers not addressed by the parties, we doubt whether the wholesale importation of the personal liability doctrine into the arena of state administration of education would have a salutory effect. 4. 1987Serv. (1978) 436 U.S. 658, 701 [ 56 L.Ed.2d 611, 641-642 , 98 S.Ct. 2018 ].) Putting aside questions of immunity of state officers not addressed by the parties, we doubt whether the wholesale importation of the personal liability doctrine into the arena of state administration of education would have a salutory effect. 4. | 1 | 1 |
Keir v. Keirgreen2 sentences1941This may rest upon the principle that: “He who takes the benefit must bear the burden.” (Civil Code, section 3521.) The general principle, including the doctrine of personal liability, is approved in Keir v. Keir, 155 Cal. 96, 99 [ 99 Pac. 487 ], *194 where it is said: “The acceptance of the property given to him by the will, charged with the payment provided for the plaintiff, imposed upon the defendant a personal liability to the plaintiff for the payment of the money as directed by the will. 1941This may rest upon the principle that: “He who takes the benefit must bear the burden.” (Civil Code, section 3521.) The general principle, including the doctrine of personal liability, is approved in Keir v. Keir, 155 Cal. 96, 99 [ 99 Pac. 487 ], *194 where it is said: “The acceptance of the property given to him by the will, charged with the payment provided for the plaintiff, imposed upon the defendant a personal liability to the plaintiff for the payment of the money as directed by the will. | 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 Ex Rel. Department of Public Works v. Nogarr
green
1 sentence2016Judgments for dismissal were entered as to respondents Specialized Loan Service and Nationstar respectively, though about two weeks apart.2 Maria separately appealed from each, and we consolidated the two appeals on our own motion.3 No published California case of which we are aware has squarely faced the question of whether a surviving spouse as surviving joint tenant takes property free and clear of an encumbrance when that surviving joint tenant is the subject of a no personal liability clause in a deed of trust.4 Three cases, however, shed sufficient light on the issue to allow us to concl | 1 | 2016–2016 |
National American Insurance v. Coburn
green
1 sentence2013Under the exclusionary clause the personal liability claim arose out of the use and loading of the van, a motor vehicle operated by the insured . . . .” ( Coburn, supra, 209 Cal.App.3d at pp. 919-920, fn. omitted.) Prince v. United Nat. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Blondeau v. Snyder
green
1 sentence1897(Blondeau v. Snyder, 95 Cal. 521 .) But when the court waited for over seventeen months after the entry of the final decree, and then without notice to defendant Bonslett amended tbe decree, in matter of substance, granting relief different from that asked for or granted originally, we think the amendment was without jurisdiction and void. | 1 | 1897–1897 |
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.