§Why CasetextPricing

Demurrer__with_motion_to_strike_ccp_43010

Motion

45 Cited authorities

  1. Hughes v. Pair

    46 Cal.4th 1035 (Cal. 2009)   Cited 1,008 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that discomfort, worry, anxiety, upset stomach, concern, and agitation did not establish severe emotional distress

  2. Miklosy v. Regents of University of California

    44 Cal.4th 876 (Cal. 2008)   Cited 467 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that when "alleged wrongful conduct ... occur at the worksite, in the normal course of the employer-employee relationship ... workers' compensation is a plaintiff exclusive remedy for any injury that may" result

  3. Reno v. Baird

    18 Cal.4th 640 (Cal. 1998)   Cited 590 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that FEHA's provisions regarding employment discrimination applied only to employers, in contrast to provisions regarding harassment which did apply to individuals as well as employers

  4. Romano v. Rockwell Internat., Inc.

    14 Cal.4th 479 (Cal. 1996)   Cited 585 times
    Holding that a FEHA action for discriminatory discharge does not commence until the actual discharge

  5. King v. United Parcel Services, Inc.

    152 Cal.App.4th 426 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 383 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding employer had no duty to accommodate employee who returned to work with a doctor's note releasing him back to "regular duties and hours" and who admitted he was able to "get the job done"

  6. Trujillo v. North County Transit Dist.

    63 Cal.App.4th 280 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 485 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the statutory language of § 12940 does not "support recovery on . . . a private right of action where there has been a specific factual finding that [the alleged] discrimination or harassment actually occurred at the plaintiffs's workplace"

  7. Jones v. Lodge at Torrey Pines Partn.

    42 Cal.4th 1158 (Cal. 2008)   Cited 294 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer may be liable for retaliation under FEHA, "but nonemployer individual may not be held personally liable for their role in that retaliation"

  8. Fisher v. San Pedro Peninsula Hosp.

    214 Cal.App.3d 590 (Cal. Ct. App. 1989)   Cited 508 times
    Holding that despite sufficiently pled sexual harassment by a physician, plaintiff must also sufficiently plead employer ratified acts to plead prayer for punitive damages against employer

  9. Gillan v. City of San Mario

    147 Cal.App.4th 1033 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007)   Cited 296 times
    Holding that police officers were not immune to suit under section 820.2 for a false arrest claim

  10. Shoemaker v. Myers

    52 Cal.3d 1 (Cal. 1990)   Cited 466 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "no employee has a vested contractual right ... beyond the time or contrary to the terms and conditions fixed by law"

  11. Section 340 - Penalty or forfeiture; libel, slander, false imprisonment, seduction, payment on forged check, neglect of animal; officer seizing property; good faith improver

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 340   Cited 1,595 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Providing a one-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims arising prior to January 1, 2003

  12. Section 3425.3 - Generally

    Cal. Civ. Code § 3425.3   Cited 75 times   1 Legal Analyses

    No person shall have more than one cause of action for damages for libel or slander or invasion of privacy or any other tort founded upon any single publication or exhibition or utterance, such as any one issue of a newspaper or book or magazine or any one presentation to an audience or any one broadcast over radio or television or any one exhibition of a motion picture. Recovery in any action shall include all damages for any such tort suffered by the plaintiff in all jurisdictions. Ca. Civ. Code