Legal Opinion

Lozada v. City and County of San Francisco

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 18, 2006No. A111423PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

KLINE, P. J.

Introduction

Is a public safety officer, when seeking actual damages and civil penalties in addition to declaratory and injunctive relief for alleged violations of the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (Gov. Code, § 3300 et seq. (POBRA)) required to present a claim to the public entity employer pursuant to the “Government Claims Act” (Gov. Code, § 900 et seq.)? We shall conclude that in this case, where the claims for money and damages pursued by the officer were more than “incidental” to the extraordinary relief sought, the answer is yes.

Police Officer…

2Cases cited40 opinions

  1. AIU Insurance v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  2. People Ex Rel. Lockyer v. Shamrock Foods Co.California Supreme Court · 2000
  3. State v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Burden v. SnowdenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Baggett v. GatesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982

35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. Parthemore v. ColCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
  2. Robinson v. Alameda CountyDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2012
  3. Canova v. Trustees of Imperial Irrigation District Employee Pension PlanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
  4. Rony v. CostaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  5. California Correctional Peace Officers Assn. v. VirgaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API