Padda v. Superior Court of Riverside Cnty.
California Court of Appeal, 5th District
1Opinion of the CourtRamirez, P. J.
*26In this matter, we have reviewed the petition, its exhibits, and the letter response filed by real parties in interest (hereafter real parties). We have determined that resolution of the matter involves the *27application of settled principles of law, and that the equities favor petitioners. We conclude that issuance of a peremptory writ in the first instance is therefore appropriate. ( Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners , Inc. (1984) 36 Cal.3d 171, 178, 203 Cal.Rptr. 626, 681 P.2d 893.)
I
DISCUSSION
This case arises from employment-related contract disputes. In 2013, petitioners, who are…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1984
- People v. EngramCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
- Taylor v. BellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. TaylorCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1921
- Betts Spring Co. v. Jardine MacHinery Co.California Court of Appeal · 1914
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Brill v. PostleDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2020
- Cisneros v. Dept. of Motor VehiclesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2024
- Cisneros v. Dept. of Motor VehiclesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2024
- Firooz v. Takata CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2020
- Wells Fargo Bank, National Assn. v. Superior Court CA4/1California Court of Appeal · 2021