Adams v. Pacific Bell Directory
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
RYLAARSDAM, Acting P. J.
Plaintiffs, 42 employees and former employees of defendant Pacific Bell Directory (employer), sued the latter, claiming its practice of debiting employees’ commissions is unlawful under Labor Code section 221 arid Business and Professions Code section 17200, although it is expressly permitted under a collective bargaining agreement between the parties. The case has been a procedural merry-go-round, if not a procedural roller coaster, for employees. Or perhaps a more appropriate metaphor is to characterize their experiences in pursuing this case as a procedural…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- DiGenova v. State Board of EducationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
- People v. ShueyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- Rescue Army v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
- Citizens for Open Access to Sand and Tide, Inc. v. Seadrift Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Clemente v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Bell v. Farmers Insurance ExchangeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- State Farm General Insurance v. Wells Fargo BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2006
- The People v. WilsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- People v. DixonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Sciborski v. Pacific Bell DirectoryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.