Cases

Filed 5/29/18 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR HARLEY SHINE, B277513 Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County v. Super. Ct. No. BC598805) WILLIAMS-SONOMA, INC., et al., Defendants and Respondents. APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court

EPSTEIN, P.J. *679*1073In this putative class action against defendants and respondents Williams-Sonoma, Inc., and Williams-Sonoma Stores, Inc. (jointly, Williams-Sonoma), plaintiff and appellant Harley Shine appeals from an order of dismissal following

732 F.Supp.2d 922 (2010) Valerie GEORGE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. SONOMA COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPT., et al., Defendants. No. C-08-02675 EDL. United States District Court, N.D. California. August 9, 2010. *926 Steven Lance Wittels, Sanford Wittels & Heisler, LLP, New York, NY, David W. Sanford, Sanford Wittels & Heisler, LLP, Wa

Filed: 04/30/21 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE THE SONOMA LAND TRUST, A159139 Plaintiff and Respondent, v. PETER THOMPSON, et al., (Sonoma County Super. Ct. No. SCV-258010) Defendants and Appellants. Peter Thompson,

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT RONALD MARTELL, No. 23-55120 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:22-cv-00920- v. JLS-MSB BRIAN COLE, San Diego County Deputy Sheriffs Cole (#0473); OPINION KERRY JOHNSON, San Diego County Deputy Sheriffs Johnson (#0497); DAVID LOVEJOY, San Diego County Deputy

4 F.Supp.2d 893 (1997) Sylvia J. WASSON, an individual, Plaintiff, v. SONOMA COUNTY JUNIOR COLLEGE DISTRICT; Governing Board of the Sonoma County Junior College District; Robert F. Agrella; James Mitchell; and John Roberts, Defendants. No. C-97-2767 WHO. United States District Court, N.D. California. December 5, 1997. *894

*754Opinion RUSHING, P. J. After attending a baseball game at Blossom Hill Park in Los Gatos, plaintiff Sara Cole returned to her vehicle, which she had parked between the north edge of the park and Blossom Hill Road. While standing near the back of her vehicle she was hit by a car driven by defendant Lucio Rodriguez, who would eventually plead guilty to

Filed 3/25/19; On remand from Supreme Court CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA CATHERINE A. BOLING et al., D069626 Petitioners, (PERB Dec. No. 2464-M) v. PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent; C

49 Cal.App.4th 402 (1996) LOUIS PETTUS, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. ALAN R. COLE et al., Defendants and Respondents. LOUIS PETTUS, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. E.I. du PONT de NEMOURS & COMPANY, INC., Defendant and Respondent. Docket Nos. A060253, A061485. Court of Appeals of California, First District, Division Two. September 12, 1996.

22 Cal.App.3d 1056 (1972) 99 Cal. Rptr. 887 ZELMA A. RATCHFORD, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. COUNTY OF SONOMA et al., Defendants and Respondents. Docket No. 28036. Court of Appeals of California, First District, Division One. January 24, 1972. *1058 COUNSEL J.A. Ratchford for Plaintiff and Appellant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JAMES O. BROWNING, District Judge. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on SWEPI’s Motion for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings, filed May 31, 2014 (Doc. 21)(“Motion”). The Court held a hearing on November 3, 2014. The primary issues are: (i) whether the Court may consider evidence outside the pleadings to determine issues of justiciability; (ii) whether Plaintiff

387 F.Supp.2d 1084 (2005) Paul D. COLE, Plaintiff, v. DOE 1 THRU 2 OFFICERS OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendants. No. C-03-5643 EMC. United States District Court, N.D. California. September 1, 2005. *1085 *1086 Paul D. Cole, Oakland, CA, pro se. Dale L. Allen, Jr., St

Opinion BAXTER, J. At the request of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 1 we address the following abstract question: “Whether, as a matter of California law, a California county and its employees can form an implied contract that confers vested rights to health benefits on

164 Cal.App.4th 629 (2008) CARSON CURCINI et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. COUNTY OF ALAMEDA et al., Defendants and Respondents. No. A115652. Court of Appeals of California, First District., Division Two. June 5, 2008. *632 Mosley & Gearinger and Stephen F. Henry for Plaintiffs and Appellants. Boornazian, Jensen &

166 Cal.App.4th 1276 (2008) VI DIMON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, Defendant and Respondent. No. B202409. Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Four. September 16, 2008. As modified September 30, 2008. *1278 Richard A. Jones; Gould & Associates, Michael A. Gould and A

ORDER ROBERT C. BROOMFIELD, Senior District Judge. INTRODUCTION This lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of the so-called “Maricopa Migrant Conspiracy Policy” (“MMCP” or “the Policy”). Am. Compl. (Doc. 45) at 3:9-10, ¶ 1. Pursuant to that Policy, allegedly “non-smuggler migrants” are “arrest[ed], detain[ed], and punish[ed] ... for conspiring to transport themselves

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 1281 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 1282 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NO

696 So.2d 1215 (1997) James B. CLAYTON, Appellant, v. SCHOOL BOARD OF VOLUSIA COUNTY, Appellee. No. 95-643. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District. May 30, 1997. Opinion Clarifying Decision July 25, 1997. *1216 Daniel R. Vaughen of Daniel R. Vaughen, P.A., and Philip L. Partridge, Deland, and Richard

567 P.2d 1257 (1977) 98 Idaho 506 DAWSON ENTERPRISES, INC., an Illinois Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BLAINE COUNTY, a subdivision of the State of Idaho, and Ray Sweat, C. W. Gardner, and Jack R. Bennett, Board of County Commissioners, Defendants-Respondents. No. 12061. Supreme Court of Idaho. August 12, 1977.

Petitioner County of Riverside seeks prohibition and mandamus to compel respondent Superior Court of San Diego County to (1) set aside a temporary restraining order and order to show cause issued February 7, 1968, in an action brought against petitioner in respondent court by Desert Outdoor Advertising, Inc. et al. (Desert), real parties in interest herein, (2) set aside a minute order of February 19, 1968, ordering transfer of the action to the Superior Court of San Mateo County, and