CA Pub. Decisions

Where businessman attempting to create joint venture with company reached an agreement with company that parties would cooperate in taking all steps necessary to obtain adequate funding and launch the project. However, the agreement did not specify what steps were necessary, how long parties were required to seek funding, form and amount of parties compensation and royalties, nature of individual party's management role, identity of investors and liquidity paths.The Trial court correctly concluded that material terms of contract, specifically conditions for performance, were fatally uncertain.

Where businessman attempting to create joint venture with company reached an agreement with company that parties would cooperate in taking all steps necessary to obtain adequate funding and launch the project. However, the agreement did not specify what steps were necessary, how long parties were required to seek funding, form and amount of parties compensation and royalties, nature of individual party's management role, identity of investors and liquidity paths.The Trial court correctly concluded that material terms of contract, specifically conditions for performance, were fatally uncertain.

Trial court erred in staying second of two five-year sentence enhancements required by Penal Code Sec. 667(a)(1) for defendant's prior serious felony conviction. Even though defendant failed to object to sentence structure when it was announced by trial court, trial court must restructure sentence where defendant did not agree in plea bargain to condition his waiver of jury trial on court staying sentence enhancement. Trial court did not abuse its discretion in imposing upper term sentence for second degree robbery on basis that numerous aggravating factors, such as prior convictions and indication of serious danger to society, outweighed single mitigating factor of defendant's good performance on parole.

Similarities between charged homicide of one victim and uncharged assault on another supported admission of evidence of latter crime to show, "intent, motive, common design or plan".

Similarities between charged homicide of one victim and uncharged assault on another supported admission of evidence of latter crime to show, "intent, motive, common design or plan".

Similarities between charged homicide of one victim and uncharged assault on another supported admission of evidence of latter crime to show, "intent, motive, common design or plan".

Similarities between charged homicide of one victim and uncharged assault on another supported admission of evidence of latter crime to show, "intent, motive, common design or plan".

Trial court erred in refusing defendant's request to recuse district attorney's office where defendant's mother had been an administrator in the district attorney's office for about 13 years and her husband, defendant's stepfather, had been employed as a deputy district attorney for same period.

Trial court erred in refusing defendant's request to recuse district attorney's office where defendant's mother had been an administrator in the district attorney's office for about 13 years and her husband, defendant's stepfather, had been employed as a deputy district attorney for same period.

Trial court erred in refusing defendant's request to recuse district attorney's office where defendant's mother had been an administrator in the district attorney's office for about 13 years and her husband, defendant's stepfather, had been employed as a deputy district attorney for same period.

Labor Code Secs. 201--providing that if an employer "discharges" an employee, wages earned and unpaid at the time of discharge are due and payable immediately--and 203--under which an employer's willful failure to pay wages to a discharged employee in accordance with Sec. 201 subjects the employer to penalties--are not limited to the situation in which an employee is terminated from an ongoing employment relationship but also apply when an employer releases an employee after completion of the specific job assignment or time duration for which the employee was hired.

Labor Code Secs. 201--providing that if an employer "discharges" an employee, wages earned and unpaid at the time of discharge are due and payable immediately--and 203--under which an employer's willful failure to pay wages to a discharged employee in accordance with Sec. 201 subjects the employer to penalties--are not limited to the situation in which an employee is terminated from an ongoing employment relationship but also apply when an employer releases an employee after completion of the specific job assignment or time duration for which the employee was hired.

Defendant insurers in contribution action challenge a declaratory judgment in favor of Plaintiff that requires them to contribute to the cost of defending environmental tort suits filed after comprehensive settlements with their mutual insured.

Education Code Sec. 56366.6(a) and (b) and California Code of Regulations, Title 5, Sec. 3068, which allow government to deny, revoke, or suspend a nonpublic, nonsectarian school's certification without a predetermination hearing. This Code does not, on their face, violate such schools' Fourteenth Amendment due process rights where financial stability of a nonpublic, nonsectarian school providing educational services to disabled children is a serious matter; there is little risk of erroneous decisionmaking because statute affords schools opportunity for postdecision hearing; and government has compelling interest in insuring that schools charged with protecting disabled children are operated in safe and lawful fashion. Statutes governing certification suspension and revocation procedures for nonpublic, nonsectarian schools are not subject to requirements for emergency administrative action specified in Government Code Sec. 11460.10 et seq. Where second amended complaint filed by particular nonpublic, nonsectarian school did not specifically allege how government applied or is applying Education Code Sec. 56366.6(a) and (b) and California Code of Regulations, Title 5, Sec. 3068 discriminatorily to it, school did not have valid claim that law was unconstitutional as applied and trial court properly dismissed suit.