Fear Not Law Unpublished Published

CA Pub. Decisions

California Supreme Court and Court of Appeal published (citable) opinions.
2,656 opinions · page 34 of 100 · 20 per page
  1. KEVIN v. SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY Part-I
    Feb 22, 2011
    Kevin R. seeks review of a juvenile court order setting a hearing under Welfare and Institutions Code section 366.26. He contends the court erred when it found that reasonable services were offered or provided to him, and terminated reunification services. Court deny the petition…
  2. In re the Marriage of MARIA FERNANDEZ-ABIN and HIGINIO SANCHEZ Part-III
    Feb 22, 2011
    Higinio Sanchez (husband) appeals the restraining order issued under the Domestic Violence Protection Act (DVPA) (Fam. Code,[1] § 6200 et seq.) protecting Maria Del Carmen Fernandez-Abin (wife) and their minor son and daughter. Husband claims the California court erred when it i…
  3. In re the Marriage of MARIA FERNANDEZ-ABIN and HIGINIO SANCHEZ Part-II
    Feb 22, 2011
    Higinio Sanchez (husband) appeals the restraining order issued under the Domestic Violence Protection Act (DVPA) (Fam. Code,[1] § 6200 et seq.) protecting Maria Del Carmen Fernandez-Abin (wife) and their minor son and daughter. Husband claims the California court erred when it i…
  4. In re the Marriage of MARIA FERNANDEZ-ABIN and HIGINIO SANCHEZ Part-I
    Feb 22, 2011
    Higinio Sanchez (husband) appeals the restraining order issued under the Domestic Violence Protection Act (DVPA) (Fam. Code,[1] § 6200 et seq.) protecting Maria Del Carmen Fernandez-Abin (wife) and their minor son and daughter. Husband claims the California court erred when it i…
  5. MKJA, INC., v. 123 FIT FRANCHISING, LLC Part-II
    Feb 22, 2011
    Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.4[1] requires that a court impose a stay of litigation whenever that court, or another court, has ordered arbitration of a controversy that is an issue in the litigation. The court in which the litigation is pending is required to "stay th…
  6. MKJA, INC., v. 123 FIT FRANCHISING, LLC Part-I
    Feb 22, 2011
    Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.4[1] requires that a court impose a stay of litigation whenever that court, or another court, has ordered arbitration of a controversy that is an issue in the litigation. The court in which the litigation is pending is required to "stay th…
  7. In re the Marriage of DEBORAH GOODMAN and ARTHUR LAWRENCE GRUEN.
    Feb 22, 2011
    In this dissolution action, we hold the family court exceeded its jurisdiction by modifying a pendente lite child and spousal support order in favor of the wife. The Legislature expressly intends that temporary support orders may not be modified retroactively. Further, the prospe…
  8. PEOPLE v. MOREHEAD
    Feb 22, 2011
    This case arose out of three bank robberies, one attempted bank robbery, and several related offenses committed over a period of three days (April 14, 21, and 22) in 2008.[1] A San Bernardino County jury found Melwatt Morehead, Jr. (Morehead) guilty of three counts of second degr…
  9. GOLDBAUM v.REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
    Feb 22, 2011
    The California Constitution (art. IX, § 9, subd. (a)) grants the Regents of the University of California (the Regents) " 'broad powers to organize and govern the university and limits the Legislature's power to regulate either the university or the [R]egents.' &#…
  10. PEOPLE v. MANZO Part-II
    Feb 22, 2011
    Arthur Martin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Martin Manzo appeals a judgment following his jury conviction of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a)),[1] discharging a firearm at an occupied vehicle (§ 246), attempted murder (…
  11. PEOPLE v. MANZO Part-I
    Feb 22, 2011
    Arthur Martin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Martin Manzo appeals a judgment following his jury conviction of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a)),[1] discharging a firearm at an occupied vehicle (§ 246), attempted murder (…
  12. PEOPLE v. HIGGINS
    Feb 22, 2011
    A modification decision.
  13. PEOPLE v. HIGGINS Part-II
    Feb 22, 2011
    A jury convicted defendant Raymond Higgins of burglary of an inhabited dwelling, assault with a deadly weapon or by means likely to cause great bodily injury, and assault with a firearm. Higgins's convictions stem from an incident in which Higgins broke into a neighbor's …
  14. PEOPLE v. HIGGINS Part-I
    Feb 22, 2011
    A jury convicted defendant Raymond Higgins of burglary of an inhabited dwelling, assault with a deadly weapon or by means likely to cause great bodily injury, and assault with a firearm. Higgins's convictions stem from an incident in which Higgins broke into a neighbor's …
  15. PEOPLE v. NAZARY Part-II
    Feb 22, 2011
    A jury convicted Wahid Yossuf Nazary of embezzlement by an employee (Pen. Code,[1] § 508; count 1) and grand theft by an employee (§ 487, subd. (b)(3); count 2). The trial court sentenced Nazary to two years in prison on count 1 and stayed the sentence on count 2 pursuant to se…
  16. PEOPLE v. NAZARY Part-I
    Feb 22, 2011
    A jury convicted Wahid Yossuf Nazary of embezzlement by an employee (Pen. Code,[1] § 508; count 1) and grand theft by an employee (§ 487, subd. (b)(3); count 2). The trial court sentenced Nazary to two years in prison on count 1 and stayed the sentence on count 2 pursuant to se…
  17. VITERBI v. WASSERMAN Part-II
    Feb 22, 2011
    In this case we are presented with an issue of first impression in California: Does the remedy of rescission in a securities fraud claim brought under Corporations Code sections 25504 and 25504.1[1] require privity of contract between the plaintiff and defendant? In other words, …
  18. VITERBI v. WASSERMAN Part-I
    Feb 22, 2011
    In this case we are presented with an issue of first impression in California: Does the remedy of rescission in a securities fraud claim brought under Corporations Code sections 25504 and 25504.1[1] require privity of contract between the plaintiff and defendant? In other words, …
  19. PEOPLE v. SAIBU Part-III
    Feb 22, 2011
    Defendants Sadiq Saibu and Antonio Valentino appeal from their convictions and sentences after a jury trial. Saibu and Valentino were convicted for their roles in committing a robbery of a video store, two attempted robberies of a liquor store, and a murder in the same liquor sto…
  20. PEOPLE v. SAIBU Part-II
    Feb 22, 2011
    Defendants Sadiq Saibu and Antonio Valentino appeal from their convictions and sentences after a jury trial. Saibu and Valentino were convicted for their roles in committing a robbery of a video store, two attempted robberies of a liquor store, and a murder in the same liquor sto…
Prev1…31323334353637…100Next
Lean category · served in 23 ms · full site view