Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Torts (78)
- Criminal Law (58)
- Criminal Procedure (55)
- State and Local Government Law (38)
- Workers' Compensation Law (27)
-
- Labor and Employment Law (24)
- Civil Law (23)
- Estates and Trusts (23)
- Civil Procedure (21)
- Family Law (21)
- Contracts (18)
- Taxation-State and Local (15)
- Property Law and Real Estate (13)
- Evidence (11)
- Constitutional Law (9)
- Insurance Law (9)
- Legal Profession (9)
- Business Organizations Law (7)
- Intellectual Property Law (7)
- Other Law (6)
- Water Law (6)
- Election Law (5)
- Securities Law (4)
- Retirement Security Law (3)
- Banking and Finance Law (2)
- Construction Law (2)
- Education Law (2)
- Medical Jurisprudence (2)
- Administrative Law (1)
- Keyword
-
- Evidence (22)
- Negligence (11)
- Personal injury (9)
- Levering Act (8)
- Loyalty oaths (8)
-
- Attorney discipline (7)
- Searches and seizures (7)
- Alimony (6)
- Habeas corpus (6)
- Homicide (6)
- Packman v. Leonard (6)
- Picketing (6)
- Spousal support (6)
- Worker's compensation (6)
- Automobile accident (5)
- Death penalty (5)
- Appeals (4)
- Breach of contract (4)
- Jury instructions (4)
- Taxation exemptions (4)
- Wrongful death (4)
- Zoning ordinances (4)
- Child support (3)
- Contributory negligence (3)
- Criminal confessions (3)
- Eminent domain (3)
- Entrapment (3)
- Estoppel (3)
- Harmless Error (3)
- Harmless error (3)
Articles 1 - 30 of 439
Full-Text Articles in Law
People V. Chambers, Jesse W. Carter
People V. Chambers, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Property that belonged to state should not have been sold for taxes, and thus county was responsible for reimbursing former owners for tax deed; statute of limitations did not apply to property owned by the state and devoted to a public use.
Wemyss V. Superior Court Of County Of Alameda, Jesse W. Carter
Wemyss V. Superior Court Of County Of Alameda, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A motion to quash a subpoena should have been granted where the underlying action was not pending in the county where the application for the subpoena was made and the clerk of that court had no authority to issue it.
Mckesson V. Lowery, Jesse W. Carter
Mckesson V. Lowery, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A district attorney was granted a writ of mandate ordering a county auditor to pay him an increased salary where the increase became effective after his appointment to office, but before his subsequent election to the office for the unexpired term.
In Re Dennis, Jesse W. Carter
In Re Dennis, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Defendant's trial and conviction constituted a denial of due process where defendant was physically present, but his mental condition was such that he was incapable of understanding the proceedings against him and unable to assist his attorney.
People V. Bernstein, Jesse W. Carter
People V. Bernstein, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
The information against defendant for contributing to the delinquency of a child was properly set aside because there was no evidence that his acts had any untoward effect whatsoever upon the child.
Gonzi V. Superior Court Of San Francisco, Jesse W. Carter
Gonzi V. Superior Court Of San Francisco, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Court granted writ of mandate directing the trial court to permit plaintiff to have a court reporter to be present when she submitted to a court ordered physical examination by a doctor employed by defendants in a negligence suit.
Santa Fe Transp. Co. V. State Board Of Equalization, Jesse W. Carter
Santa Fe Transp. Co. V. State Board Of Equalization, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Taxes were improperly refunded to a common carrier because intracity operations which were an inseparable part of intercity operations could not be considered exempt from the gross receipts tax.
Vangel V. Vangel, Jesse W. Carter
Vangel V. Vangel, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Judgment in favor of the remaining partners in their dissolution action was affirmed where the decision of the trial court in determining the amount of compensation the faulty partner was entitled to was supported by substantial evidence.
Courtell V. Mceachen [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Courtell V. Mceachen [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
The evidence supported the theory that a five-year-old minor child was contributorily negligent with respect to her injuries, so it was reversible error to give the jury an instruction that negated the child's contributory negligence.
Hunter V. Mohawk Petroleum Corp. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Hunter V. Mohawk Petroleum Corp. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A California gas station was not liable for personal injury one customer caused to another customer where no evidence showed that the gas station was on notice that the customer was acting, or might act, negligently.
Gomes V. Byrne [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Gomes V. Byrne [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Because plaintiff assumed the risk that a dog barking at him through a fence would bite him if he entered through the gate of the fence, the dog's owner was not liable for injuries resulting from the dog bite.
In Re Bandmann, Jesse W. Carter
In Re Bandmann, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
An inmate's application for a writ of habeas corpus based upon an improper sentence being imposed was denied and the matter was remanded to the trial court for reconsideration of the sentence.
In Re Osslo [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
In Re Osslo [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Two probationers could reject probation that they did not assent to at trial after the final appeal was decided because they never manifested acceptance of the terms of the probation, especially a prohibition from holding union offices.
Stockton Theatres, Inc, V. Palermo, Jesse W. Carter
Stockton Theatres, Inc, V. Palermo, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A bond was necessary where evidence showed that a lessee moved his money out of state and placed it in his brother's name in order to "protect" it from attachment. The bond was to be allowed as a cost on appeal.
Los Angeles County Flood Control Dist. V. Southern California Edison Co. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Los Angeles County Flood Control Dist. V. Southern California Edison Co. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
By accepting a franchise right in public streets, a utility was subject to an implied obligation to relocate its facilities at its own expense when necessary to make way for the laying of storm drains by a flood control district.
People V. Berve, Jesse W. Carter
People V. Berve, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Threats and coercion by others than police rendered a confession later obtained by the police inadmissible because the right to a fair trial extended beyond police activity.
Tupper V. Superior Court Of Marin County [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Tupper V. Superior Court Of Marin County [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Where an accused's commitment was not based entirely on incompetent evidence, a writ of prohibition did not lie to review of the ruling of the magistrate on a procedural matter.
Laird V. T. W. Mather, Inc. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Laird V. T. W. Mather, Inc. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
In a personal injury action brought by a customer against a department store, the trial court committed reversible error by instructing the jury on the presumption of due care after the customer had testified as to her own acts and conduct.
M.C. Nelson, Et Al., V. C.H. Reisner, Jesse W. Carter
M.C. Nelson, Et Al., V. C.H. Reisner, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Judgment in favor of lessee in lessors' breach of lease action was proper because it could not be said as a matter of law that there was no evidence that the lessee had used good and farmer-like methods in developing the leased property.
In Re Petersen [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
In Re Petersen [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Ordinances allowing a police chief to designate exclusive taxicab stands and prohibiting competing companies from standing therein, was a valid exercise of a municipality's police power and was not invalidly discriminatory.
San Francisco V. Ho Sing, Jesse W. Carter
San Francisco V. Ho Sing, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Municipality had a right to recover indemnity from property owners for the amount it was compelled to pay a pedestrian for injuries received when she fell over a defective skylight in a sidewalk in front of the abutting property owners' premises.
People Ex Rel. Averna V. Palm Springs [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People Ex Rel. Averna V. Palm Springs [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Judgment was entered in favor of a city in a quo warranto action challenging the annexation of uninhabited land because annexation was not unreasonable, and the permissible shape, character, and extent of the annexed land was a political question.
Guerrieri V. Severini, Jesse W. Carter
Guerrieri V. Severini, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Where seller repudiated a contract for goods, buyer had the right to treat the declaration as a wrongful renunciation of the contract and obtain similar goods to fulfill the obligation, then seek damages from the seller for the increased cost.
California Gasoline Retailers V. Regal Petroleum Corp., Jesse W. Carter
California Gasoline Retailers V. Regal Petroleum Corp., Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Promotional give-away program was not a lottery for lack of consideration where tickets were widely distributed to customers and non-customers, and no product or ticket purchase was necessary.
Kollert V. Cundiff [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Kollert V. Cundiff [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A jury instruction on contributory negligence with respect to an adult passenger was prejudicial where the jury might have believed that the driver's negligence was attributable to the adult riding in the car.
Deshotel V. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Deshotel V. Atchison, T. & S. F. R. Co. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Where the legislature had not changed the common law rule that a wife could not recover for the loss of consortium resulting from her husband's negligent injury, the wife had no claim for such losses against those who caused her husband's injury.
Gomez V. Superior Court Of Mendocino County, Jesse W. Carter
Gomez V. Superior Court Of Mendocino County, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Where petitioners were charged with grand theft, but the jury found them guilty only of petty theft, which judgment was reversed on appeal, they could not later be retried for grand theft, because double jeopardy protections attached.
Alarid V. Vanier [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Alarid V. Vanier [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Although a driver rear-ended another car, there was sufficient evidence for a jury to conclude that the driver took reasonable steps to maintain his brakes, and therefore the driver was able to overcome the statutory presumption of negligence.
Peiser V. Mettler, Jesse W. Carter
Peiser V. Mettler, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A change of venue was inappropriate because the lessor's suit was not local, the lessee was a proper and necessary party who resided in the county where the suit was filed, and the lease terms were unambiguous not requiring further evidence.
People V. Friend [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
People V. Friend [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
The comments of the judge were in keeping with the Constitution and the established limitations on his power, and there was no sound basis for concluding that the question of penalty was not fairly tried.