How have the courts interpreted the rule of common law in determining whether a person is entitled to sue under the California Family Law Act?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Hosking v. Spartan Properties, Inc., 275 Cal.App.2d 152, 79 Cal.Rptr. 893 (Cal. App. 1969):
The court then added that because this, the Pianka case, was the first time the question had been decided it would not hold to the rule but test the judgment by the rule of prior decisions. In subsequent cases, the rule has been followed. (Lavine v. Jessup (1957) 48 Cal.2d 611 at 614, 311 P.2d 8.)
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
What is the test for determining whether a person is entitled to sue under the California Family Law Act? (California, United States of America)
How has the California Supreme Court interpreted statutory interpretation in the context of the California Family Law Act? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted section 1016.5 of the California Immigration Code and how have the courts interpreted the word 'court' in that section? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted section 830.6(1) of the California Highway Code of Civil Procedure when determining whether a defendant is immune from liability under the California Motor Vehicle Act? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the California Land Use Act when determining whether the California Department of Justice can exercise its police power? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted section 1202.4 of the California Criminal Code when determining whether a defendant has the ability to pay a restitution fine? (California, United States of America)
What is the "reasonable person" standard in determining whether a person is a reasonable person? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted section 19996.2(a) of the California Civil Code of Civil Procedure when determining whether an employee has been on an unauthorized leave for a period of time? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted section 654 of the California Penal Code to determine whether an armed robber committed three separate crimes? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted section 1203.1(1) of the California Criminal Code to determine that a defendant is entitled to restitution exceeding the damages for which he is held culpable? (California, United States of America)
