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.
5 California opinions name it 1 courts 2016–2025 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Hedayati v. Interinsurance Exchange of the Auto. Clubgreen2 sentences2025Co. (2007) 42 Cal.4th 713, 724, fn. 7 ; accord, Hedayati, supra, 67 Cal.App.5th at p. 843; see also Reid, supra, 220 Cal.App.4th at p. 278 [summary judgment].) State Farm argues the trial court’s bad faith findings should be reviewed de novo because the facts surrounding Simone’s settlement offer and State Farm’s response are undisputed and these facts demonstrate the court made a legal error. 2025Co. (2007) 42 Cal.4th 713, 724, fn. 7 ; accord, Hedayati, supra, 67 Cal.App.5th at p. 843; see also Reid, supra, 220 Cal.App.4th at p. 278 [summary judgment].) State Farm argues the trial court’s bad faith findings should be reviewed de novo because the facts surrounding Simone’s settlement offer and State Farm’s response are undisputed and these facts demonstrate the court made a legal error. | 1 | 1 |
Wilson v. 21st Century Insurancegreen1 sentence2025Co. (2007) 42 Cal.4th 713, 724, fn. 7 ; accord, Hedayati, supra, 67 Cal.App.5th at p. 843; see also Reid, supra, 220 Cal.App.4th at p. 278 [summary judgment].) State Farm argues the trial court’s bad faith findings should be reviewed de novo because the facts surrounding Simone’s settlement offer and State Farm’s response are undisputed and these facts demonstrate the court made a legal error. | 1 | 1 |
Reid v. Mercury Insurancegreen2 sentences2025Co. (2007) 42 Cal.4th 713, 724, fn. 7 ; accord, Hedayati, supra, 67 Cal.App.5th at p. 843; see also Reid, supra, 220 Cal.App.4th at p. 278 [summary judgment].) State Farm argues the trial court’s bad faith findings should be reviewed de novo because the facts surrounding Simone’s settlement offer and State Farm’s response are undisputed and these facts demonstrate the court made a legal error. 2025Co. (2007) 42 Cal.4th 713, 724, fn. 7 ; accord, Hedayati, supra, 67 Cal.App.5th at p. 843; see also Reid, supra, 220 Cal.App.4th at p. 278 [summary judgment].) State Farm argues the trial court’s bad faith findings should be reviewed de novo because the facts surrounding Simone’s settlement offer and State Farm’s response are undisputed and these facts demonstrate the court made a legal error. | 1 | 1 |
County of Los Angeles v. Southern California Edison Co.green1 sentence2024Defendants rely on County of Los Angeles v. Southern Cal. Edison Co. (2003) 112 Cal.App.4th 1108, 1121 (County), where the court stated: “Failure to move for a new trial on the ground of excessive or inadequate damages precludes a challenge on appeal to the amount of damages if the challenge turns on the credibility of witnesses, conflicting evidence, or other factual questions. . . . [¶] ‘When defendants first challenge the damage award on appeal, without a motion for new trial, they unnecessarily burden the appellate courts with issues which can and should be resolved at the trial level. . . | 1 | 1 |
Rayii v. Gatica CA2/3green2 sentences2021(Norasingh, at p. 753; see Rayii, supra, 218 Cal.App.4th at p. 1408 .) Husband alternatively argues the court made a legal error in denying his motion because the court did not understand a unilateral mistake alone could support relief under section 2122, subdivision (e). 2021(Norasingh, at p. 753; see Rayii, supra, 218 Cal.App.4th at p. 1408 .) Husband alternatively argues the court made a legal error in denying his motion because the court did not understand a unilateral mistake alone could support relief under section 2122, subdivision (e). | 1 | 1 |
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians v. Superior Courtgreen1 sentence2016Rather, they appear to be attempting to reargue the question of the JIV's tribal status de novo on appeal. 17 an official list of all federally recognized tribes in the Federal Register. (25 U.S.C § 479a-1.) "Appearance on the list grants the tribes immunities and privileges, including immunity from unconsented suit, by virtue of their relationship with the United States. (67 Fed.Reg. 46, 328 (July 12, 2002).)" (Agua Caliente, supra, at p. 243, fn.1 , italics added.)10 The Department of the Interior is required by statute to annually update the list of federally recognized tribes. (25 U.S.C. § | 1 | 1 |
Frank B. James v. United States Department of Health and Human Servicesgreen2 sentences2016Rather, they appear to be attempting to reargue the question of the JIV's tribal status de novo on appeal. 17 an official list of all federally recognized tribes in the Federal Register. (25 U.S.C § 479a-1.) "Appearance on the list grants the tribes immunities and privileges, including immunity from unconsented suit, by virtue of their relationship with the United States. (67 Fed.Reg. 46, 328 (July 12, 2002).)" (Agua Caliente, supra, at p. 243, fn.1 , italics added.)10 The Department of the Interior is required by statute to annually update the list of federally recognized tribes. (25 U.S.C. § 2016Rather, they appear to be attempting to reargue the question of the JIV's tribal status de novo on appeal. 17 an official list of all federally recognized tribes in the Federal Register. (25 U.S.C § 479a-1.) "Appearance on the list grants the tribes immunities and privileges, including immunity from unconsented suit, by virtue of their relationship with the United States. (67 Fed.Reg. 46, 328 (July 12, 2002).)" (Agua Caliente, supra, at p. 243, fn.1 , italics added.)10 The Department of the Interior is required by statute to annually update the list of federally recognized tribes. (25 U.S.C. § | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Alameda County Social Services Agency v. Natasha B.
green
1 sentence2016(See In re T.G. (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 976, 987 .) For instance, mother asserts that the court made a legal error by assuming that the parents were not entitled to delegate Hunter’s care to an appropriate caretaker while disposition was pending. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
In Re Cole C.
green
1 sentence2016To support this claim, she launches into an extended legal analysis regarding the exact nature of Hunter’s release from detention at the July 29, 2014, detention hearing and its impact on the parents retained custodial rights to Hunter, including the right to chose an alternate caregiver for the 6 Citing Cole C., supra, 174 Cal.App.4th at page. 917, a number of cases in this area have asserted that the jurisdictional findings are “prima facie evidence” that the child cannot safely remain in the home.” (See, e.g., In re T.V. (2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 126, 135 ; John M., supra, 212 Cal.App.4th at p | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Kahawaiolaa v. Norton
green
1 sentence2016Rather, they appear to be attempting to reargue the question of the JIV's tribal status de novo on appeal. 17 an official list of all federally recognized tribes in the Federal Register. (25 U.S.C § 479a-1.) "Appearance on the list grants the tribes immunities and privileges, including immunity from unconsented suit, by virtue of their relationship with the United States. (67 Fed.Reg. 46, 328 (July 12, 2002).)" (Agua Caliente, supra, at p. 243, fn.1 , italics added.)10 The Department of the Interior is required by statute to annually update the list of federally recognized tribes. (25 U.S.C. § | 1 | 2016–2016 |
San Diego County Health & Human Services Agency v. Tyrone V.
green
1 sentence2016To support this claim, she launches into an extended legal analysis regarding the exact nature of Hunter’s release from detention at the July 29, 2014, detention hearing and its impact on the parents retained custodial rights to Hunter, including the right to chose an alternate caregiver for the 6 Citing Cole C., supra, 174 Cal.App.4th at page. 917, a number of cases in this area have asserted that the jurisdictional findings are “prima facie evidence” that the child cannot safely remain in the home.” (See, e.g., In re T.V. (2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 126, 135 ; John M., supra, 212 Cal.App.4th at p | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Los Angeles County Department of Children & Family Services v. L.C.
green
1 sentence2016To support this claim, she launches into an extended legal analysis regarding the exact nature of Hunter’s release from detention at the July 29, 2014, detention hearing and its impact on the parents retained custodial rights to Hunter, including the right to chose an alternate caregiver for the 6 Citing Cole C., supra, 174 Cal.App.4th at page. 917, a number of cases in this area have asserted that the jurisdictional findings are “prima facie evidence” that the child cannot safely remain in the home.” (See, e.g., In re T.V. (2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 126, 135 ; John M., supra, 212 Cal.App.4th at p | 1 | 2016–2016 |
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.