Grissom v. Vons Companies, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
JACKMAN, J. * —
I
In this case we explore an employer’s duties under Labor Code section 2802, 1 which requires an employer to “indemnify” his or her employee “for all that the employee necessarily expends or loses in direct consequence of the discharge” of the employee’s duties. 2 As explained below, the employer’s duties include reimbursement of funds the employee “necessarily expends” to obtain independent counsel to defend an action for conduct within the course and scope of his or her employment. Because the plaintiff in this case may have necessarily expended fimds for such counsel,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- San Diego Navy Federal Credit Union v. Cumis Insurance SocietyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984
- Merritt v. Reserve InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973
- Youngman v. Nevada Irrigation DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- Okun v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1981
- Douglas v. Los Angeles Herald-ExaminerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Janken v. GM Hughes ElectronicsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
- Edwards v. Arthur Andersen LLPCalifornia Supreme Court · 2008
- Gattuso v. Harte-Hanks Shoppers, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2007
- Los Angeles Police Protective League v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Jacobus v. Krambo Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2000
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.