Legal Opinion
Monahan v. Department of Water & Power
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 29, 1941No. Civ. 13321PublishedCited by 55 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HANSON, J. pro tem.
In this action for declaratory relief the plaintiffs, who under civil service rules are classified as “journeymen linemen” and are employed by the Department of Water and Power of the City of Los Angeles, allege in their complaint that they are entitled to receive the same pay, i. e., $225 per month, as is paid to those journeymen linemen whom the department designates and details as “troublemen,” because, so the;*' allege, they perform duties that are similar to and identical with the duties performed by the latter. As a basis for their alleged cause of action they aver…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Aetna Life Insurance v. HaworthSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Pennie v. ReisSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Dakota Central Telephone Co. v. South Dakota Ex Rel. PayneSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Pierce Oil Corp. v. City of HopeSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Isbrandtsen-Moller Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by55 opinions
- Board of Education v. Dresden SwanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
- Abbott v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
- Bekiaris v. Board of EducationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Rible v. HughesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
- California State Employees'assn. v. St. of Calif.California Court of Appeal · 1973
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.