California Correctional Peace Officers Association v. Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
C.A. 3rd; C078723 The Third Appellate District reversed a judgment. The court held that a state employee’s claim of discrimination due to military…
September 11, 2017 at 06:29 PM
4 minute read
C.A. 3rd;
C078723
The Third Appellate District reversed a judgment. The court held that a state employee's claim of discrimination due to military service was not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the State Personnel Board (SPB).
Sammie Gardner applied for a position with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) in 2000 while he was on active duty with the U.S. Air Force. Gardner received two job offers from CDCR and began separation from service in about August 2001. Following 9/11, Gardner was reinstated to active duty and was unable to report to CDCR for a scheduled training academy. Gardner was released from duty in December 2002 and reported to CDCR. He was told there was a hiring freeze in effect and that he would need to reapply. CDCR did not hire Gardner until 2005. The California Correctional Peace Officers Association (POA) filed a grievance against CDCR on behalf of Gardner, alleging discrimination based on military status in violation of the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA). The Department of Personnel Administration (DPA) granted the grievance.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Supreme Court Hearing on Facebook's Alleged Nondisclosure Yields 'Freakish' Hypotheticals
Supreme Court Grapples With San Francisco's Aging Sewer System in EPA Case
Facebook, Nvidia Make High Court Case Against Investor Suits
Trending Stories
- 1What Does Ohio Supreme Court's Opioid Decision Mean for Public Nuisance Claims?
- 2Bucking Industry Trend, Sidley Austin Elects Biggest Class of Partners in Firm History
- 3US Judge Throws Out Sale of Infowars to The Onion. But That's Not the End of the Road for Sandy Hook Families
- 4‘Really Deflating’: Judges React to Biden Threat to Veto New Judgeships Bill
- 53 Incidents Lead to Charges Against the Alexander Brothers; Cousin Remains at Large
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
