Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The California Constitution originally made the Supreme Court the only appellate court for the whole state. As the state's population skyrocketed during the 19th century, the Supreme Court was expanded from three to seven justices, and then the Court began hearing the majority of appeals in three-justice panels.
The California Court Case Management System (CCMS) is the court case management system intended for use by the several courts of the judiciary of California, which includes the Supreme Court, 6 Courts of Appeal, and 58 Superior Courts.
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California (in case citations, N.D. Cal.) is the federal United States district court whose jurisdiction comprises the following counties of California: Alameda, Contra Costa, Del Norte, Humboldt, Lake, Marin, Mendocino, Monterey, Napa, San Benito, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa ...
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California (in case citations, E.D. Cal.) is a federal court in the Ninth Circuit (except for patent claims and claims against the U.S. government under the Tucker Act, which are appealed to the Federal Circuit).
One quirk of California law is that when a party petitions the appellate courts for a writ of mandate (California's version of mandamus), the case name becomes [petitioner name] v. Superior Court (that is, the superior court is the respondent on appeal), and the real opponent is then listed below those names as the " real party in interest ".
The Hall case has been described as "containing some of the most offensive racial rhetoric to be found in the annals of California appellate jurisprudence" and "the worst statutory interpretation case in history." [43] Houston v. Williams (1859): [44] A leading case on the separation of powers [45] under the California Constitution. Escola v.
Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!
Regents of the University of California, 17 Cal. 3d 425, 551 P.2d 334, 131 Cal. Rptr. 14 (Cal. 1976), was a case in which the Supreme Court of California held that mental health professionals have a duty to protect individuals who are being threatened with bodily harm by a patient. The original 1974 decision mandated warning the threatened ...