How have courts interpreted language in the context of the meaning of the word "intent to kill" in a civil case?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from The People v. Venegas, G041958, Super. Ct. No. 05NF0836 (Cal. App. 2011):
Venegas relies on language in People v. Ratliff (1986) 41 Cal.3d 675 for the proposition that the "intent to kill cannot be presumed from aiming and firing of a gun." Ratliff is distinguishable because it involved the issue of whether the trial court's failure
Page 9
"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 interpreting the meaning of the word "reasonable and common sense interpretation" in the context of the California Civil Code of Civil Procedure Act? (California, United States of America)
In what circumstances will the Supreme Court strike down a section of the Civil Rights Act that prohibits the use of certain types of civil rights, such as civil liberties, as well as those of the individual, in the context of civil liberties? (California, United States of America)
In a contract impairment case arising out of section 340.9(1) of the California Civil Code of Civil Procedure Act, is there any case law where the court has found that the provision does not apply to all cases? (California, United States of America)
In a contract impairment case arising out of section 340.9(1) of the California Civil Code of Civil Procedure Act, is there any case law where the court has found that the provision does not apply to all cases? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the meaning of the California Civil Code in the context of "Liberal interpretation"? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the meaning of the word "intention" in the context of a section of the California Civil Code? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the statutory language of the Sexual Offences Prevention Act (SVPA) in the context of sexual assault cases? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted the language of a verdict in a civil case where parents of a minor defendant were charged on the basis of their statutory liability as endorsers of the application for a driver's license? (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)
Does the court have any case law with respect to the interpretation of the law in the context of personal injury cases? (California, United States of America)
