Legal Opinion

Altaville Drug Store, Inc. v. Employment Development Department

California Supreme Court

Decided January 4, 1988No. S000269PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*233Opinion

PANELLI, J.

This case involves Unemployment Insurance Code section 1032, which sets forth circumstances in which benefits awarded to a claimant are not charged to the reserve account of the employer.1 Specifically, we must decide whether section 1032 was intended by the Legislature to operate in connection with section 1256 (eligibility for benefits) so that a later expansion of the word “spouse” in section 1256 mandates use of the same expanded definition in the application of section 1032. We conclude that it does.

I. Facts and Procedural History

On December 29, 1983, Belinda Dillard…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Select Base Materials, Inc. v. Board of EqualizationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1959
  2. California Teachers Ass'n v. San Diego Community College DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1981
  3. People v. AliCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  4. Sand v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Interstate Brands v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Lexin v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
  2. Donovan v. Poway Unified School DistrictCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
  3. State Farm General Insurance v. JT's Frames, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2010
  4. Yassin v. SolisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
  5. In Re Microsoft I-V CasesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006

16 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