Legal Opinion

Jarvis v. Henderson

California Supreme Court

Decided April 3, 1953No. Sac. 6281PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*602EDMONDS, J.

The principal question here, as in Martin v. Henderson and Redwine v. Henderson, ante, p. 583 [255 P.2d 416], is whether a former state highway patrol officer is entitled to payment for hours worked prior to February 6, 1943, in excess of regular hours of duty, for which he received no compensating time off during his period of service. An additional question presented is whether such officer may receive payment for work performed before that date on days which normally would have been days off or holidays.

The facts are undisputed. Jarvis entered service with the highway patrol in…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Boren v. State Personnel BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Martin v. HendersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Pohle v. ChristianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Robinson v. DunnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Walker v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  2. Treu v. KirkwoodCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
  3. Markman v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
  4. Holtzendorff v. Housing AuthorityCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
  5. Adams v. City of ModestoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960

13 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