§Why CasetextPricing

KIRBY v. IMMOOS FIRE PROTECTION

Respondent's Answer Brief on the Merits

34 Cited authorities

  1. Cel-Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co.

    20 Cal.4th 163 (Cal. 1999)   Cited 2,420 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Holding that for an act to be "unfair," it must "threaten" a violation of law or "violate the policy or spirit of one of those laws because its effects are comparable to or the same as a violation of the law"

  2. Martinez v. Combs

    49 Cal.4th 35 (Cal. 2010)   Cited 479 times   45 Legal Analyses
    Holding that California's wage and hour laws do not impose liability on "individual corporate agents acting within the scope of their agency"

  3. Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Productions Inc.

    40 Cal.4th 1094 (Cal. 2007)   Cited 513 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Holding that California Labor Code claims have a three-year statute of limitations

  4. Morillion v. Royal Packing

    22 Cal.4th 575 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 331 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that compulsory travel time on bus from departure point to work site is compensable

  5. California Teachers Assn. v. Governing Bd. of Rialto Unified School Dist.

    14 Cal.4th 627 (Cal. 1997)   Cited 344 times
    Describing the judicial role of construing statutes consistent with their plain meaning and other indicia of legislative intent

  6. Burden v. Snowden

    2 Cal.4th 556 (Cal. 1992)   Cited 346 times

    Docket No. S021885. April 30, 1992. Appeal from Superior Court of Orange County, No. 590772, William F. Rylaarsdam, Judge. COUNSEL Thomas Kathe, City Attorney, Filarsky Watt, Steve A. Filarsky, Pillsbury, Madison Sutro, Amy D. Hogue and Kevin M. Fong for Defendants and Appellants. Mayer Reeves, Thomas M. Reeves, Irving Berger, Martin J. Mayer, Whitmore, Johnson Bolanos, Richard S. Whitmore, Craig W. Patenaude and Helene L. Leichter as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants. John K. York

  7. People v. Roberge

    29 Cal.4th 979 (Cal. 2003)   Cited 223 times
    In People v. Roberge (2003) 29 Cal.4th 979 [ 129 Cal.Rptr.2d 861, 62 P.3d 97] (Roberge), we analyzed the word "likely" in the context of section 6600, subdivision (a)(1), which sets forth as a condition for an SVP determination that a person "has a diagnosed mental disorder that makes the person a danger to the health and safety of others in that it is likely that he or she will engage insexually violent criminal behavior."

  8. Tiernan v. Trustees of Cal. St. University Colleges

    33 Cal.3d 211 (Cal. 1982)   Cited 378 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a temporary employee's failure to exhaust her administrative remedies barred her judicial claim that the university had violated her First Amendment rights when it failed to reappoint her as an archivist

  9. Murillo v. Fleetwood Enterprises, Inc

    17 Cal.4th 985 (Cal. 1998)   Cited 181 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding the Act should be interpreted to support its remedial purpose

  10. Kelly v. Stamps.com Inc.

    135 Cal.App.4th 1088 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 130 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Rejecting contention that employer's two-installment bonus program created implied contract that the plaintiff's employment would continue until date second installment was due

  11. Section 207 - Maximum hours

    29 U.S.C. § 207   Cited 10,432 times   225 Legal Analyses
    Establishing overtime rules

  12. Section 24

    Cal. Const. art. I § 24   Cited 193 times
    Making explicit that "[r]ights guaranteed by this Constitution are not dependent on those guaranteed by the United States Constitution"

  13. Section 1770 - Determination of general prevailing rate of per diem wages

    Cal. Lab. Code § 1770   Cited 84 times   1 Legal Analyses

    The Director of the Department of Industrial Relations shall determine the general prevailing rate of per diem wages in accordance with the standards set forth in Section 1773, and the director's determination in the matter shall be final except as provided in Section 1773.4. Nothing in this article, however, shall prohibit the payment of more than the general prevailing rate of wages to any worker employed on public work. This chapter does not permit any overtime work in violation of Article 3.

  14. Section 11160 - Wages, Hours and Working Conditions for Certain On-Site Occupations in the Construction, Drilling, Logging and Mining Industries

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 11160   Cited 62 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Requiring employers to "authorize and permit all employees to take rest periods ... daily at the rate of ten minutes net rest time for every four hours worked"

  15. Section 11000 - Order Regulating the Minimum Wage

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 11000   Cited 46 times
    Raising California's minimum wage to $6.25 per hour in 2001, and to $6.75 per hour, effective January 1, 2002

  16. Rule 8.520 - Briefs by parties and amici curiae; judicial notice

    Cal. R. 8.520   Cited 3,146 times

    (a)Parties' briefs; time to file (1) Within 30 days after the Supreme Court files the order of review, the petitioner must serve and file in that court either an opening brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (2) Within 30 days after the petitioner files its brief or the time to do so expires, the opposing party must serve and file either an answer brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (3) The petitioner may file a reply brief on the merits or