Stubblefield Construction Co. v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
GAUT, Acting P. J.
In this matter we are, as happens far too often, called upon to reconcile and attempt to harmonize two statutes which strenuously resist any effort to make sense of them. Of the two possible results argued by the parties, neither is either compelled or compelling. Nevertheless, in our view the conclusion we reach comports best with the intent of the Legislature as we understand it and does the least violence to the English language. We find that petitioners’ attempt to disqualify the trial judge was timely and that the trial court erred in finding otherwise.
The facts…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Hale v. MorganCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- People v. BroussardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- Carney v. SimmondsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
- Passavanti v. WilliamsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
- Scott v. FarrarCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Peracchi v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
- Geddes v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- People v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
- Paterno v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.