§Why CasetextPricing

TRI-FANUCCHI FARMS v. AGRICULTURAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

Petitioner’s Notice of Errata

19 Cited authorities

  1. Steele v. L. N.R. Co.

    323 U.S. 192 (1944)   Cited 957 times
    Holding that a labor organization must represent all members of a "craft or class of employees . . . regardless of their union affiliations or want of them"

  2. Simo v. Union of Needletrades, Indus.

    322 F.3d 602 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 176 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that defendants were entitled to summary judgment on IIED claim for lack of severe emotional distress evidence, even though plaintiffs testified to feeling fearful, nervous, tense, and emotionally hurt

  3. Gay Law Students Assn. v. Pacific Tel. Tel. Co.

    24 Cal.3d 458 (Cal. 1979)   Cited 174 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that allegations can reasonably be construed as defendant having adopted a policy where "[p]laintiffs allege that [defendant] discriminates against 'manifest' homosexuals and against persons who make 'an issue of their homosexuality. . . .'"

  4. Pinsker v. Pacific Coast Soc. of Orthodontists

    12 Cal.3d 541 (Cal. 1974)   Cited 124 times
    Holding "whenever a private association is legally required to refrain from arbitrary action, the association's action must be substantively rational and procedurally fair"

  5. Gerhard v. Stephens

    68 Cal.2d 864 (Cal. 1968)   Cited 137 times
    Holding that the quiet title plaintiff "can prevail only by the establishment of his own title and not by reliance upon a weakness in defendant's title" such that the plaintiff "must prove a title in himself superior to that of defendant"

  6. Bearden v. U.S. Borax, Inc.

    138 Cal.App.4th 429 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 37 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In Bearden, supra, 138 Cal.App.4th 429 our colleagues in Division Four reviewed an order dismissing the complaint filed by six mine workers against their employer, U.S. Borax, for, among other alleged Labor Code violations, its failure to allow a second meal period during the 12-hour shifts they were working.

  7. J.R. Norton Co. v. Agricultural Labor Relations Bd.

    26 Cal.3d 1 (Cal. 1979)   Cited 78 times
    In J. R. Norton, we held that that the Board cannot award make-whole relief as a per se remedy for technical refusals to bargain.

  8. Montebello Rose Co. v. Agricultural Labor Relations

    119 Cal.App.3d 1 (Cal. Ct. App. 1981)   Cited 65 times
    Affirming ALRB's conclusion that a certified union continues to enjoy that status after the initial certification year expires

  9. James v. Marinship Corp.

    25 Cal.2d 721 (Cal. 1944)   Cited 161 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In James v. Marinship Corp., 25 Cal.2d 721, 155 P.2d 329, the California Supreme Court held that a union could not exclude Negroes from membership in the union when at the same time there was a closed shop in the industry.

  10. Tri-Fanucchi Farms v. Agricultural Labor Relations Board

    236 Cal.App.4th 1079 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015)

    F069419 05-14-2015 TRI–FANUCCHI FARMS, Petitioner, v. AGRICULTURAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent; United Farm Workers of America, Real Party in Interest. Sagaser, Watkins & Wieland, Howard A. Sagaser, William M. Woolman and Ian B. Wieland, Fresno, for Petitioner. J. Antonio Barbosa, Paul M. Starkey, Sacramento, and Scott P. Inciardi for Respondent. Mario Martinez, Bakersfield, Thomas P. Lynch and Edgar I. Aguilasocho for Real Party in Interest. KANE, J. Sagaser, Watkins & Wieland, Howard A. Sagaser

  11. Section 20390 - Decertification and Rival Union Petitions

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 20390   Cited 1 times

    (a) Where the incumbent union presently has a collective bargaining agreement with the employer, the petition shall contain an allegation that the agreement will expire within the next twelve months or has been in existence for more than three years, and shall be accompanied by evidence of support by 30% or more of the employees currently employed in the bargaining unit. (b) Where the incumbent union presently does not have a collective bargaining agreement with the employer, the petition shall contain

  12. 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