California Supreme Court and Court of Appeal published (citable) opinions.
-
PEOPLE v. RICHARD LACY LETNER and CHRISTOPHER ALLAN TOBIN Part VI
Sep 27, 2010
Defendants Richard Lacy Letner and Christopher Allan Tobin were convicted of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),[1] burglary (§ 459), robbery (§§ 211, 212.5), attempted rape (§§ 664, 261, subd. (2)), and theft of an automobile (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), arising f…
-
PEOPLE v. RICHARD LACY LETNER and CHRISTOPHER ALLAN TOBIN Part VII
Sep 27, 2010
Defendants Richard Lacy Letner and Christopher Allan Tobin were convicted of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),[1] burglary (§ 459), robbery (§§ 211, 212.5), attempted rape (§§ 664, 261, subd. (2)), and theft of an automobile (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), arising f…
-
PEOPLE v. RICHARD LACY LETNER and CHRISTOPHER ALLAN TOBIN Part VIII
Sep 27, 2010
Defendants Richard Lacy Letner and Christopher Allan Tobin were convicted of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),[1] burglary (§ 459), robbery (§§ 211, 212.5), attempted rape (§§ 664, 261, subd. (2)), and theft of an automobile (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), arising f…
-
SANTA CLARA v. SUPERIOR COURT OF SANTA Part-I
Sep 27, 2010
A group of public entities composed of various California counties and cities (collectively referred to as the public entities) are prosecuting a public-nuisance action against numerous businesses that manufactured lead paint (collectively referred to as defendants). The public e…
-
SANTA CLARA v. SUPERIOR COURT OF SANTA Part-II
Sep 27, 2010
A group of public entities composed of various California counties and cities (collectively referred to as the public entities) are prosecuting a public-nuisance action against numerous businesses that manufactured lead paint (collectively referred to as defendants). The public e…
-
SANTA CLARA v. SUPERIOR COURT OF SANTA Part-III
Sep 27, 2010
A group of public entities composed of various California counties and cities (collectively referred to as the public entities) are prosecuting a public-nuisance action against numerous businesses that manufactured lead paint (collectively referred to as defendants). The public e…
-
KLEIN v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Part-I
Sep 27, 2010
Plaintiff Alan Richard Klein was riding a bicycle for recreation on a two-lane paved road in Angeles National Forest in Southern California when he was struck head-on by an automobile driven by a part-time volunteer working for the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Having …
-
KLEIN v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Part-II
Sep 27, 2010
Plaintiff Alan Richard Klein was riding a bicycle for recreation on a two-lane paved road in Angeles National Forest in Southern California when he was struck head-on by an automobile driven by a part-time volunteer working for the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Having …
-
KLEIN v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Part-III
Sep 27, 2010
Plaintiff Alan Richard Klein was riding a bicycle for recreation on a two-lane paved road in Angeles National Forest in Southern California when he was struck head-on by an automobile driven by a part-time volunteer working for the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Having …
-
PEOPLE v. PEREZ
Sep 27, 2010
Defendant fired a single bullet at a distance of 60 feet, from a car going 10 to 15 miles per hour, at a group of seven peace officers and a civilian who were standing less than 15 feet apart from one another in a dimly lit parking lot late on the night in question. There was evi…
-
In re MICHAEL B. PRATHER Part-I
Sep 27, 2010
Court granted review in these two cases to determine the proper scope of an order directed to the Board of Parole Hearings (the Board) when a reviewing court concludes that a decision to deny parole by the Board is not supported by â€
-
In re MICHAEL B. PRATHER Part-II
Sep 27, 2010
Court granted review in these two cases to determine the proper scope of an order directed to the Board of Parole Hearings (the Board) when a reviewing court concludes that a decision to deny parole by the Board is not supported by â€
-
Melchor v. Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Center
Sep 27, 2010
Jose Melchor and Natalie Melchor, by and through their guardians ad litem, Martin Melchor and Ramona Melchor, appeal from a judgment entered after the court granted the summary judgment motion of respondent Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Center (Fresno Community). Appellan…
-
Melchor v. Pena
Sep 27, 2010
Jose Melchor and Natalie Melchor, by and through their guardians ad litem, Martin Melchor and Ramona Melchor, appeal from a judgment entered after the court granted the summary judgment motion of respondents Jorge Pena, M.D. and Gina Marie Adair, M.D. Appellants contend: a triabl…
-
DeSilva Gates Construction v. M. Bumgarner, Inc.
Sep 24, 2010
DeSilva Gates Construction, L.P. (DeSilva Gates) appeals from a determination of the Alameda County Superior Court, following a jury trial, that subcontractor M. Bumgarner, Inc. (MBI) owed DeSilva Gates neither a duty to defend nor a duty to indemnify under the terms of the subco…
-
LA SERENA PROPERTIES v. WEISBACH
Sep 24, 2010
A modification decision.
-
KHAN v. LOS ANGELES CITY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM Part-I
Sep 24, 2010
The Los Angeles City Employees Retirement System (LACERS) appeals from a judgment in favor of Abraham Khan (Khan) granting his petition for writ of mandate compelling LACERS to approve his request for concurrent deferred retirement benefits with LACERS and the Judicial Retirement…
-
KHAN v. LOS ANGELES CITY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM Part-II
Sep 24, 2010
The Los Angeles City Employees Retirement System (LACERS) appeals from a judgment in favor of Abraham Khan (Khan) granting his petition for writ of mandate compelling LACERS to approve his request for concurrent deferred retirement benefits with LACERS and the Judicial Retirement…
-
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT v. CASASOLA Part-I
Sep 24, 2010
Respondent Los Angeles Unified School District (the District) acquired by eminent domain property on which appellants Rudy and Teresa Casasola (the Casasolas) operated a small business. The Casasolas relocated their business to a new, larger property and spent nearly $1.4 million…
-
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT v. CASASOLA Part-II
Sep 24, 2010
Respondent Los Angeles Unified School District (the District) acquired by eminent domain property on which appellants Rudy and Teresa Casasola (the Casasolas) operated a small business. The Casasolas relocated their business to a new, larger property and spent nearly $1.4 million…