Legal Opinion

Tomlinson v. Qualcomm, Inc.

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 17, 2002No. D037347PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

MCDONALD, Acting P. J.

Appellant Lona Tomlinson, an at-will employee of respondent Qualcomm, Inc., received a family leave of absence from her employment as provided by California’s Family Rights Act (Gov. Code, § 12945.2) (CFRA) and Qualcomm’s personnel policies. During Tomlinson’s family leave of absence, Qualcomm implemented a company-wide reduction in work force; Tomlinson was among the more than 300 employees whose employment was terminated. Tomlinson argues that the CFRA immunizes persons on family leave from employment termination. She alternatively argues that Qualcomm’s…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Sierra Club v. State Board of ForestryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Ford Dealers Assn. v. Department of Motor VehiclesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Camp v. Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & MarmaroCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
  5. Malmstrom v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1986

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Habitat Trust for Wildlife, Inc. v. City of Rancho CucamongaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  2. Jadwin v. County of KernDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2009
  3. Helm Financial Corp. v. Iowa Northern Railway Co.District Court, N.D. Iowa · 2002
  4. Mason v. Telefunken Semiconductors America, LLCCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2015
  5. San Diego County Employees Retirement Ass'n v. County of San DiegoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007

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