Legal Opinion · Dissent

Asmus v. Pacific Bell

California Supreme Court

Decided June 1, 2000No. S074296Published

1Dissent

*19GEORGE, C. J.

—I respectfully dissent.

We granted the request of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to answer the following certified question of law: “Once an employer’s unilaterally adopted policy—which requires employees to be retained so long as a specified condition does not occur—has become a part of the employment contract, may the employer thereafter unilaterally rescind the policy, even though the specified condition has not occurred?” (Italics added.) The majority, however, inexplicably answers a different question— one in which it is assumed by the majority that…

2Cases cited45 opinions

  1. Parks School of Business, Inc., Dba Parks College, a New Mexico Corporation v. Fife Symington Roy A. Nicholson Sally HeinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
  2. Foley v. Interactive Data Corp.California Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Pine River State Bank v. MettilleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
  4. Torosyan v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
  5. California Lettuce Growers, Inc. v. Union Sugar Co.California Supreme Court · 1955

40 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