5 California opinions name it 1 courts 1993–2014 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 |
|---|---|---|
Minish v. Hanuman Fellowshipgreen2 sentences2013When the moving party makes a prima facie showing, the third and final step is to determine whether the opposition demonstrates the existence of a triable issue of material fact. [Citation.] [][] In performing these steps, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion, liberally construe the opposing party’s evidence, strictly construe the moving party’s evidence, and resolve all doubts in favor of the opposing party.” (Minish v. Hanuman Fellowship (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 437, 444 [ 154 Cal.Rptr.3d 87 ].) State Farm’s motion for summary judgment was based on 2013When the moving party makes a prima facie showing, the third and final step is to determine whether the opposition demonstrates the existence of a triable issue of material fact. [Citation.] [][] In performing these steps, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion, liberally construe the opposing party’s evidence, strictly construe the moving party’s evidence, and resolve all doubts in favor of the opposing party.” (Minish v. Hanuman Fellowship (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 437, 444 [ 154 Cal.Rptr.3d 87 ].) State Farm’s motion for summary judgment was based on | 1 | 2 |
Montrose Chemical Corp. v. Superior Courtgreen2 sentences1998(Buss v. Superior Court, supra, 16 Cal.4th at p. 46; Montrose Chemical Corp. v. Superior Court (1993) 6 Cal.4th 287, 295 [ 24 Cal.Rptr.2d 467 , 861 P.2d 1153 ].) Conversely, in an action filed against the insured in which there is no potential that the insurer will have to provide indemnification, then, as a general rule, there is no duty to defend. 1998(Buss v. Superior Court, supra, 16 Cal.4th at p. 46; Montrose Chemical Corp. v. Superior Court (1993) 6 Cal.4th 287, 295 [ 24 Cal.Rptr.2d 467 , 861 P.2d 1153 ].) Conversely, in an action filed against the insured in which there is no potential that the insurer will have to provide indemnification, then, as a general rule, there is no duty to defend. | 1 | 1 |
O'DELL v. Freightliner Corp.green2 sentences1993Anything less constitutes a denial of due process in that it would deprive the employer of a substantial right to protect his [or her] interest in defending against a charge of negligence and thus effectively prevent him [or her] (or his [or *1509 her] lien claimant) from successfully asserting his [or her] claim for reimbursement as to those monies already expended on behalf of plaintiff-employee.” (Brandon v. Santa Rita Technology, Inc., supra, at p. 846, fn. omitted.) “In such a case, the employer must file a complaint in intervention in order to protect its rights.” (O’Dell v. Freightliner 1993Anything less constitutes a denial of due process in that it would deprive the employer of a substantial right to protect his [or her] interest in defending against a charge of negligence and thus effectively prevent him [or her] (or his [or *1509 her] lien claimant) from successfully asserting his [or her] claim for reimbursement as to those monies already expended on behalf of plaintiff-employee.” (Brandon v. Santa Rita Technology, Inc., supra, at p. 846, fn. omitted.) “In such a case, the employer must file a complaint in intervention in order to protect its rights.” (O’Dell v. Freightliner | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
City of Bell v. Superior Court
green
1 sentence2014We are also not required to address the board members' assertions that resolution R-297335 alone satisfies the requirements of section 995.8, and section 996.6 provides an independent basis for affirming the judgment. 19 to have acted with fraud, and providing him a defense would have created a conflict of interest between him and the city employer. ( Bell, supra, 220 Cal.App.4th at pp. 241, 243-244, 261.) In contrast, the board members were not accused of theft-related crimes; the City was not a victim, but rather solicited the approval of MP2; the board members based their defense request on | 1 | 2014–2014 |
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.