39 Cited authorities

  1. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 276,823 times   369 Legal Analyses
    Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing
  2. Toyota Motor Mfg., Ky., Inc. v. Williams

    534 U.S. 184 (2002)   Cited 2,471 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding "substantially" and "major" "need to be interpreted strictly to create a demanding standard for qualifying as disabled," and therefore, to be disabled "an individual must have an impairment that prevents or severely restricts the individual from doing activities that are of central importance to most people’s daily lives"
  3. Starr v. Baca

    652 F.3d 1202 (9th Cir. 2011)   Cited 5,495 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a series of investigative reports documenting systemic deficiencies in a jail put the defendant-supervisor on notice of the risk of the harm that befell the plaintiff
  4. Yanowitz v. L'Oreal USA Inc.

    36 Cal.4th 1028 (Cal. 2005)   Cited 1,570 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that to establish a "protected activity," an "employee's communications to the employer [must] sufficiently convey the employee's reasonable concerns that the employer has acted or is acting in an unlawful discriminatory manner."
  5. Blank v. Kirwan

    39 Cal.3d 311 (Cal. 1985)   Cited 3,071 times
    Holding that the standard for a failure to state a claim is whether "the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action"
  6. Turner v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.

    7 Cal.4th 1238 (Cal. 1994)   Cited 683 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiff's "claim of whistle-blower harassment fails because he cannot demonstrate the required nexus between his reporting of alleged statutory violations and his allegedly adverse treatment"
  7. Green v. Ralee Engineering Co

    19 Cal.4th 66 (Cal. 1998)   Cited 484 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employee who reported the sale of defective aircraft parts did state a claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy because his action was directly connected to federal regulation of air safety
  8. Trujillo v. North County Transit Dist.

    63 Cal.App.4th 280 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 482 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"
  9. Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co.

    27 Cal.3d 167 (Cal. 1980)   Cited 840 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that at-will employees may recover tort damages from employers if they can show they were discharged in contravention of fundamental public policy
  10. Hanson v. Lucky Stores, Inc.

    74 Cal.App.4th 215 (Cal. Ct. App. 1999)   Cited 381 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "a finite leave of absence has been considered to be a reasonable accommodation under ADA, provided it is likely that following the leave the employee would be able to perform his or her duties"
  11. Section 1102.5 - Whistleblower protection

    Cal. Lab. Code § 1102.5   Cited 1,258 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Making it unlawful for an employer to impose any policy which "prevent an employee from disclosing information to a government or law enforcement agency ... or to another employee who has authority to investigate, discover, or correct the violation or noncompliance"
  12. Section 12940 - Unlawful employment practices

    Cal. Gov. Code § 12940   Cited 1,011 times
    Prohibiting discrimination because of "sex, ... sexual orientation," etc.
  13. Section 1200 - Liberal construction

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 1200   Cited 7 times

    Every provision of this chapter shall be liberally construed to protect the interests of all persons affected. Ca. Bus. and Prof'l. Code § 1200 Repealed and added by Stats. 1951, Ch. 1727.

  14. Section 102 - Coverage

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 17 § 102

    (a) The Department shall grant all loans which qualify, to the extent that funds are available, provided that: (1) Such amount represents an excess of $300,000 in a medical injury tort judgment or settlement, the $300,000 being covered by insurance or reserve account, as specified in Section 100(a)(4)(B). (2) The total amount of such loans does not exceed $1,000,000 in the aggregate. (b) Physicians in the local community who are employees of the hospital district shall be covered for medical injury