Legal Opinion

Theroux v. State of California

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 17, 1984No. Civ. 68469PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

GATES, J.

Defendants State of California and State Controller Ken Cory appeal from the judgment entered in favor of Mary Theroux, Susan Balliger and Christine Morales contending: “[I.] The exclusion of respondents from Senate Bill 91 [SB 91] does not violate constitutional due process or equal protection provisions. [II.] The State Controller cannot disburse state monies contrary to the legislative purpose of Senate Bill 91, even if unconstitutional.”

Senate Bill No. 91 (now Stats. 1979, ch. 192) awards a lump sum payment to certain classes of state employees including “current employees…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Amador Valley Joint Union High School District v. State Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Kern v. City of Long BeachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  3. Miller v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Olson v. CoryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
  5. Valdes v. CoryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. White v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Courtney v. State Department of HealthWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1989
  3. County of Orange v. Association of Orange County Deputy SheriffsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
  4. American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees v. Civil Service CommissionWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1984
  5. AFSCME v. Civil Serv. Com'n of W. Va.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1984

3 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