6 California opinions name it 2 courts 2002–2023 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Litton Financial Printing Div., Litton Business Systems, Inc. v. NLRBgreen2 sentences2002(Litton Financial Printing Div. v. NLRB, supra, 501 U.S. at p. 198 [ 111 S.Ct. at p. 2221 ].) Most terms and conditions of employment are subject to this prohibition on unilateral changes, which derives from the statutory requirement to bargain in good faith. 2002(Litton Financial Printing Div. v. NLRB, supra, 501 U.S. at p. 198 [ 111 S.Ct. at p. 2221 ].) Most terms and conditions of employment are subject to this prohibition on unilateral changes, which derives from the statutory requirement to bargain in good faith. | 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. Serrato
green
2 sentences2023The Serrato Exception to Double Jeopardy In 1973, the Supreme Court discussed an exception to its double jeopardy precedent in People v. Serrato (1973) 9 Cal.3d 753 (Serrato), 3 As the Alaska Supreme Court explained: “ ‘[I]f a more severe sentence may be imposed after retrial for any reason, there will always be a definite apprehension on the part of the accused that a heavier sentence may be imposed. . . . 2023The Serrato Exception to Double Jeopardy In 1973, the Supreme Court discussed an exception to its double jeopardy precedent in People v. Serrato (1973) 9 Cal.3d 753 (Serrato), 3 As the Alaska Supreme Court explained: “ ‘[I]f a more severe sentence may be imposed after retrial for any reason, there will always be a definite apprehension on the part of the accused that a heavier sentence may be imposed. . . . | 2 | 2023–2023 |
Quintano v. Mercury Casualty Co.
green
2 sentences2018Insurance Code section 11580.2, subdivision (p)(3) ( section 11580.2(p)(3) ) states that underinsured motorist coverage "does not apply to any bodily injury until the limits of bodily injury liability policies applicable to all insured motor vehicles causing the injury have been exhausted by payment of judgments or settlements, and proof of the payment is submitted to the insurer providing the underinsured motorist coverage." The Supreme Court discussed this requirement in Quintano v. Mercury Casualty Co . (1995) 11 Cal.4th 1049 , 48 Cal.Rptr.2d 1 , 906 P.2d 1057 ( Quintano ), stating, "[S]ect 2018Insurance Code section 11580.2, subdivision (p)(3) ( section 11580.2(p)(3) ) states that underinsured motorist coverage "does not apply to any bodily injury until the limits of bodily injury liability policies applicable to all insured motor vehicles causing the injury have been exhausted by payment of judgments or settlements, and proof of the payment is submitted to the insurer providing the underinsured motorist coverage." The Supreme Court discussed this requirement in Quintano v. Mercury Casualty Co . (1995) 11 Cal.4th 1049 , 48 Cal.Rptr.2d 1 , 906 P.2d 1057 ( Quintano ), stating, "[S]ect | 2 | 2018–2018 |
Sherwin-Williams Co. v. City of Los Angeles
green
1 sentence2002In Sherwin-Williams Co. v. City of Los Angeles, supra, 4 Cal.4th 893, the Supreme Court discussed the test of whether the Los Angeles ordinance regulating the display of aerosol paint cans was “contradictory” to the state statute regulating the sale of aerosol paint cans to minors. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
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.