Fear Not Law Unpublished Published

CA Pub. Decisions

California Supreme Court and Court of Appeal published (citable) opinions.
2,656 opinions · page 33 of 100 · 20 per page
  1. COUNTY OF ORANGE v. ASSOCIATION OF ORANGE COUNTY DEPUTY SHERIFFS Part-II
    Feb 18, 2011
    In 2008, the County of Orange (Orange County or the County) sued the board of the County's retirement plan, claiming that an enhanced retirement formula for prior years of service adopted in 2001 by the County Board of Supervisors violated the California Constitution. The Cou…
  2. COUNTY OF ORANGE v. ASSOCIATION OF ORANGE COUNTY DEPUTY SHERIFFS Part-I
    Feb 18, 2011
    In 2008, the County of Orange (Orange County or the County) sued the board of the County's retirement plan, claiming that an enhanced retirement formula for prior years of service adopted in 2001 by the County Board of Supervisors violated the California Constitution. The Cou…
  3. HYPERTOUCH, INC., v.VALUECLICK, INC Part-II
    Feb 18, 2011
    Appellant Hypertouch, Inc. filed an action alleging that ValueClick, Inc., various ValueClick subsidiaries and PrimaryAds, Inc. (Respondents) violated Business & Professions Code section 17529.5[1], subdivision (a), which prohibits entities from advertising in a commercial electr…
  4. HYPERTOUCH, INC., v.VALUECLICK, INC Part-I
    Feb 18, 2011
    Appellant Hypertouch, Inc. filed an action alleging that ValueClick, Inc., various ValueClick subsidiaries and PrimaryAds, Inc. (Respondents) violated Business & Professions Code section 17529.5[1], subdivision (a), which prohibits entities from advertising in a commercial electr…
  5. PANNU v.LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, INC
    Feb 18, 2011
    Sukhsagar Pannu suffered a severe spinal injury, resulting in quadriplegia, when his Land Rover Discovery (Series 1) sport utility vehicle rolled over following a chain of collisions on the 118 Freeway near Simi Valley. Pannu sued Land Rover North America, Inc., Jaguar Land Rover…
  6. PEOPLE v. WHITE
    Feb 18, 2011
    The procedures attendant to a criminal defendant's right to discover relevant evidence in confidential peace officer personnel files--through the filing of a so-called "Pitchess"[1] motion--are established by both statute and decisional law.[2] The defining hallmark o…
  7. PEOPLE v. CABALLERO
    Feb 18, 2011
    Defendant Rodrigo Caballero appeals from the judgment entered following his conviction by jury of three counts of willful, deliberate, and premeditated attempted murder, with findings that he personally and intentionally discharged a firearm, inflicted great bodily injury upon on…
  8. PEOPLE v. MIRANDA
    Feb 18, 2011
    Defendant Humberto Miranda appeals from the judgment of conviction of attempted murder, second degree robbery, possession of a firearm by a felon and assault with a firearm. He contends principally: (1) there was insufficient evidence to support the conviction on all of the subst…
  9. BROWN v. GRIMES
    Feb 18, 2011
    For the following three reasons, the trial court refused to enforce a fee-sharing agreement between lawyers plaintiff James Brown and defendant Milton Grimes arising out of cases they handled in Texas: Brown had not performed his contractual responsibility to pay Paul Ross, a thi…
  10. ZUBARAU v. PALMDALE Part-II
    Feb 18, 2011
    Plaintiff Alec Zubarau, an amateur or â€
  11. ZUBARAU v. PALMDALE Part-I
    Feb 18, 2011
    Plaintiff Alec Zubarau, an amateur or â€
  12. PEOPLE v. VILA
    Feb 18, 2011
    A criminal defendant has a hard enough time defending the underlying charge. He should not "pick a new fight" with the prosecutor and yet another fight with his court appointed counsel, i. e. he should not threaten to kill them thereby creating two new cases to defend. He…
  13. CITIZENS PLANNING ASSOCIATION v. SANTA BARBARA
    Feb 18, 2011
    The City of Santa Barbara (City) approved the development of 25 single-family homes. The project was to be constructed by real parties in interest and appellants, Peak-Las Positas Partners and its managing partner, Mark Lee (Las Positas). The City and Las Positas wished to provid…
  14. ROE v.DOE Part-II
    Feb 18, 2011
    Code of Civil Procedure section 340.1 is an interpretive beast, a Frankenstein's monster of legislative parts stitched together over 16 years. And like Shelley's literary counterpart, this legislative monster is easily misunderstood, especially when it comes to the 2002 a…
  15. ROE v.DOE Part-I
    Feb 18, 2011
    Plaintiffs John Roe 58 and John Roe 61 appeal from the judgment of dismissal entered after the trial court sustained without leave to amend the demurrers of various Catholic Church entities to their first amended complaint. Because the statute of limitations on the plaintiffs&#39…
  16. In re Marriage of SANDRA and EDWARD FOSSUM
    Feb 18, 2011
    Appellant Edward Fossum and his ex-wife, respondent Sandra Fossum purchased a house in 1994. To obtain the best interest rate, the property was purchased in Edward's[1] name alone, but later title was placed in both spouses' names. In 1998, the parties agreed to enter int…
  17. PEOPLE v. ARMAS
    Feb 18, 2011
    Defendant and appellant Jose Armas was convicted, following a plea of nolo contendere, of one count of lewd conduct with a person under 14.[1] Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant was sentenced to probation, subject to several conditions, including sex offender registration.[2…
  18. NORTEL NETWORKS INC v.STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION
    Feb 18, 2011
    This appeal requires an interpretation of the Sales and Use Tax Law. (Rev. & Tax. Code, § 6001 et seq.)[1] Nortel Networks Inc. sells telephone switching equipment in California. Income from switch hardware sales is indisputably taxable by the State of California. The question i…
  19. SCHOENFELD v. BOARD OF PAROLE HEARINGS
    Feb 18, 2011
    Plaintiff Richard Schoenfeld is currently incarcerated for crimes he committed approximately 35 years ago. On October 30, 2008, the Board of Parole Hearings (Board) found him suitable for parole. On August 14, 2009, at a hearing to calculate his release date under applicable inde…
  20. BOLOGNA v. SAN FRANCISCO
    Feb 18, 2011
    This case arises from the tragic and senseless killings of Anthony Bologna and his sons Michael and Matthew, who were stopped in traffic in San Francisco when Edwin Ramos, an illegal immigrant, allegedly shot and killed them. Plaintiffs Danielle, Andrew, and Francesca Bologna are…
Prev130313233343536100Next
Lean category · served in 20 ms · full site view