Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 31 - 60 of 64

Full-Text Articles in Law

People's Church Of San Fernando Valley, Inc. V. County Of Los Angeles [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Apr 1957

People's Church Of San Fernando Valley, Inc. V. County Of Los Angeles [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Trial court improperly held that taxpayer was entitled to exemption even though taxpayer refused to comply with statutory mandate requiring affirmance that it did not advocate violent overthrow of government because statute was reasonable regulation.


First Methodist Church V. Horstmann [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Apr 1957

First Methodist Church V. Horstmann [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Church taxpayers were not entitled to tax exemption because they refused to execute non-subversive oath that was statutorily and constitutionally required. Non-subversive oath could validly be required of churches as condition to granting exemption.


Speiser V. Randall [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Apr 1957

Speiser V. Randall [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

A veteran was not entitled to a veterans' tax exemption, despite that he met all requirements, because in his application, he refused to subscribe to the nonsubversive oath required by the California Constitution and by statute.


First Unitarian Church V. County Of Los Angeles [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Apr 1957

First Unitarian Church V. County Of Los Angeles [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

A church that refused to include in its property tax exemption application a required nonsubversive declaration was barred from receiving the exemption. Making an oath was contrary to the church's religious beliefs.


Dissent In First Unitarian Church Of Los Angeles V. County Of Los Angeles Apr 1957

Dissent In First Unitarian Church Of Los Angeles V. County Of Los Angeles

The Jesse Carter Collection

48 Cal. 2d. 419


Fraenkel V. Trescony [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Apr 1957

Fraenkel V. Trescony [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

The court found that contractor could not take advantage of the licensing exemption for construction performed incidental to farming in his action against landowner because this exemption only applied to structures actually located on the farm.


Estate Of Poisl, Jesse W. Carter Apr 1957

Estate Of Poisl, Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

The court denied defendant widow's motion to dismiss plaintiff attorney's appeal, in plaintiff's suit for attorney's fees because the receipt of payment of the award of attorney's fees did not bar the appeal from that award.


Los Angeles V. Belridge Oil Co., Jesse W. Carter Apr 1957

Los Angeles V. Belridge Oil Co., Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

A taxpayer was subject to a license tax for only that portion of its gross receipts derived from sales within a city because allowing the city to levy a license tax on sales outside the city was a denial of equal protection of the law.


Reed V. Norman, Jesse W. Carter Apr 1957

Reed V. Norman, Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

The presence of a defunct corporation in a derivative action could have been dispensed with when the circumstances warranted such an exercise of the court's equitable powers.


People V. Hardenbrook, Jesse W. Carter Apr 1957

People V. Hardenbrook, Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

The prior consistent statement of a witness was properly admitted to refute an inference of recent fabrication of the testimony. A lay witness was not competent to testify as to defendant's ability to commit premeditated murder.


O'Malley V. Petroleum Maintenance Co., Jesse W. Carter Apr 1957

O'Malley V. Petroleum Maintenance Co., Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

A company could not seek judicial review of an arbitrator's decision that the discharge of an employee was arbitrable because the company entered into an arbitration submission agreement in which it agreed to arbitrate that question.


Bratnober V. Bratnober [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Apr 1957

Bratnober V. Bratnober [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Wife's appeal from her divorce decree's alimony and child support levels was rejected; although the levels were reduced from the interlocutory levels, the husband's future finances were such that the lower levels of support were appropriate.


Garibaldi V. Borchers Bros. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Apr 1957

Garibaldi V. Borchers Bros. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

A trial court did not err in giving an instruction on continuing negligence in conjunction with an instruction on last clear chance, and an instruction on a truck driver's right to assume that a minor would exercise the care of a child his age.


People V. Cheary [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Apr 1957

People V. Cheary [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Defendant's new trial motion was properly denied where sufficient evidence supported the jury's imposition of the death penalty based on defendant's conviction for first-degree murder.


Barrera V. De La Torre [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Mar 1957

Barrera V. De La Torre [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

The trial court did not err in instructing jury that it could not infer driver's negligence from mere happening of accident, even though facts would support giving of res ipsa loquitur instruction; driver's negligence was question of fact for jury.


Herda V. Herda [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Mar 1957

Herda V. Herda [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Termination of an ex-husband's support obligations to his ex-wife and to his children was appropriate because the ex-wife had remarried and the parties' children had reached the age of majority.


People Ex Rel. Department Of Public Works V. Russell [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Mar 1957

People Ex Rel. Department Of Public Works V. Russell [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Award of severance damages for landowner's non-abutting parcel in condemnation case was vacated because county road relocation did not impair landowner's easement on parcel but was an inconvenience suffered as member of public and was noncompensable.


Lewis & Queen V. N. M. Ball Sons [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Mar 1957

Lewis & Queen V. N. M. Ball Sons [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Where subcontractor undertook contracting work and only one of its partners had contracting license it was in violation of state licensing laws and because it did not have a license, it was not entitled to maintain an action for compensation.


Malone V. Superior Court Of San Francisco, Jesse W. Carter Mar 1957

Malone V. Superior Court Of San Francisco, Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

As the political party member could only prove he would be entitled to relief on his claims regarding the illegal expenditure and concealment of political party funds, he was only entitled to perpetuate testimony and issue subpoenas on that issue.


Estate Of Radovich, Jesse W. Carter Mar 1957

Estate Of Radovich, Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Where an individual had been declared to be an adopted son in equity for purposes of inheriting an estate, it was error to impose an inheritance tax at the rate applicable to a stranger, as the declared status was final and res judicata.


Glendale V. Trondsen, Jesse W. Carter Mar 1957

Glendale V. Trondsen, Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

A charge for rubbish collection that was imposed by a city ordinance was a reasonable exercise of the police power. Residents received the benefit of rubbish collection availability notwithstanding fact that they chose not to use the services.


Williams V. Reed, Jesse W. Carter Feb 1957

Williams V. Reed, Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Where makers on promissory notes received value from the loans, they were not accommodation makers and were liable on the notes.


Wildman V. Government Employees' Ins. Co., Jesse W. Carter Feb 1957

Wildman V. Government Employees' Ins. Co., Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Restrictive endorsement in motor vehicle insurance policy, which purported to preclude coverage when a third party drove the vehicle with the insured's permission, was ambiguous and was also violative of the California Vehicle Code.


Wilson V. Beville, Jesse W. Carter Feb 1957

Wilson V. Beville, Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Landowner was not required to file a claim with the city before obtaining compensation for taking a part of his property for a public street easement under the doctrine of inverse condemnation.


Taylor V. Hawkinson [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Feb 1957

Taylor V. Hawkinson [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Compromise verdict for passenger, her husband, and driver of husband's car after first trial did not render issue of liability res judicata on retrial, and judgment on liability was not binding upon driver of other car until after he could attack it.


Walnut Creek V. Silveira, Jesse W. Carter Feb 1957

Walnut Creek V. Silveira, Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Limited Obligation Bond Law was a valid general law because it related to a municipal affair by providing new streets to provide for the greatly increased traffic circulation in commercial area and general fund was not liable for payment of bonds.


Automotriz Del Golfo De California S. A. De C. V. V. Resnick [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Jan 1957

Automotriz Del Golfo De California S. A. De C. V. V. Resnick [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

In determining whether the buyers could escape personal liability for debts due to the seller, the trial court was entitled to consider the failure to issue any stock and the buyers' creation and operation of the business with little or no capital.


Hayward Lumber & Inv. Co. V. Biscailuz [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Jan 1957

Hayward Lumber & Inv. Co. V. Biscailuz [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Sheriff was justified as matter of law in ordering release of funds from attachment pursuant to certificate of court clerk which appeared complete and regular on its face, and, appeared to an ordinarily intelligent and informed layman to be final.


Brandelius V. San Francisco [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Jan 1957

Brandelius V. San Francisco [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

City and county were entitled to a new trial in a survivor's wrongful death suit. Evidence that the city's cable car had the last clear chance to avoid the accident at issue in the trial warranted a jury instruction on the last clear chance doctrine.


Santa Barbara County Water Agency V. All Persons & Parties [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Jan 1957

Santa Barbara County Water Agency V. All Persons & Parties [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Trial court properly declared validity of existence of county water agency and member units, but improperly declared contracts valid because excess land provisions in contracts would have constituted denials of due process and equal protection.