California Court of Appeal - April 2003 Opinion Summaries
Page 7 of 8
Showing Result 61 - 70 of 76
| Description | Date | Docket # |
|---|---|---|
HEYMAN v. FRANCHISE MORTGAGE ACCEPTANCE CORP.California Court of Appeal
Property Law & Real Estate
Where there is no evidence of an elaborate conspiracy to keep records and information related the profitability of franchisee loans and the financial...
|
04/08/2003 | G030352 |
MORRISON v. HOUS. AUTH. OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES BD. OF COMM'RSCalifornia Court of Appeal
Administrative Law, Labor & Employment Law, Property Law & Real Estate
Commissioners violated the Brown Act by conducting a closed hearing on the charges against plaintiff without giving her notice of the right to be...
|
04/07/2003 | B158358 |
LEE v. LOS ANGELES COUNTY METRO. TRANSIT AUTH.California Court of Appeal
Civil Procedure, Injury & Tort Law, Property Law & Real Estate
In an action for continuous and repeated damage to real property based on inverse condemnation and nuisance, the cause of action does not accrue until...
|
04/04/2003 | B155843 |
PEOPLE v. PORTILLOCalifornia Court of Appeal
Criminal Law & Procedure
Conviction for first degree murder under the felony-murder doctrine is affirmed, where the trial court's alleged erroneous answer to a jury question...
|
04/04/2003 | D038761 |
WEBER v. UNITED PARCEL SERV., INC.California Court of Appeal
Health Law, Injury & Tort Law, Labor & Employment Law, Workers' Compensation
A tort claim alleging injuries as a result of a tumor not diagnosed, following tests administered by an employer, comes under the exclusive provisions...
|
04/03/2003 | B153284 |
PEOPLE v. CHAGOYANCalifornia Court of Appeal
Criminal Law & Procedure
After dismissal of drug charges, the trial court abused its discretion in denying, without conducting an evidentiary hearing, a Penal Code section...
|
04/03/2003 | B160159 |
IN RE VITAMIN CASESCalifornia Court of Appeal
Antitrust & Trade Regulation, Civil Procedure, Class Actions, Commercial Law, Consumer Protection Law, Drugs & Biotech
Code of Civil Procedure section 384 does not bar settlement of a class claim alleging price-fixing by vitamin product manufacturers, as neither that...
|
04/03/2003 | A097905 |
PFEIFFER VENICE PROPERTIES v. SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY (BERNARD)California Court of Appeal
Civil Procedure, Landlord Tenant Law
Post-appeal peremptory challenges, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6(2), are not the exclusive right of parties who were appellants on...
|
04/02/2003 | B162707 |
PEOPEL v. HENDERSONCalifornia Court of Appeal
Criminal Law & Procedure, Sentencing
Because Pen. Code section 1202.45 became effective after defendant committed the crimes, the trial court erred in imposing the parole revocation fine....
|
04/02/2003 | E029887 |
REYNOLDS v. BEMENTCalifornia Court of Appeal
Civil Procedure, Class Actions, Labor & Employment Law
(Industry: Autos) Since plaintiff has chosen to stand on those causes of action as to which the trial court granted leave to amend, he cannot amend the First Amended...
|
04/02/2003 | B158966 |