Schultz v. Regents of University of California
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
SIMS, J.
In this case we hold, among other things, that the trial court improperly granted summary judgment requiring defendant Regents of the University of California (hereafter University) to provide plaintiff a hearing in connection with the reclassification of his job. We conclude plaintiff failed to show the job reclassification deprived him of a property interest sufficient to invoke federal constitutional guarantees of due process of law. In so holding we clarify our prior opinion in Ng v. State Personnel Bd. (1977) 68 Cal.App.3d 600 [137 Cal.Rptr. 387]. We also conclude that…
2Cases cited50 opinions
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. DoyleSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Goldberg v. KellySupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Perry v. SindermannSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Ryan v. California Interscholastic Federation-San Diego SectionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
- Las Lomas Land Company, LLC v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- Shoemaker v. County of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- Mohilef v. JanoviciCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1996
- Elijahjuan v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.