Legal Opinion

Holmgren v. County of Los Angeles

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 30, 2008No. B194130PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

VOGEL, J.

As expressly authorized by its charter and by section 31000 of the Government Code, the County of Los Angeles outsourced engineering work to two firms which over the course of many years provided engineers to perform specified work for the county. The engineers were employees of the contracting firms and paid by the contracting firms, and all signed written acknowledgements that they were not employees of the county and not entitled to any of the benefits available to county employees. Three of these engineers nevertheless filed this class action against the county, contending…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Miller v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Reynolds v. BementCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Estrada v. Fedex Ground Package System, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2007
  4. Big Creek Lumber Co. v. County of Santa CruzCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
  5. Dibb v. County of San DiegoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Curcini v. County of AlamedaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
  2. Munroe v. Los Angeles County Civil Service CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
  3. Bennett v. Rancho Cal. Water Dist., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
  4. AIDS Healthcare Foundation v. BontaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2024
  5. Bennett v. Rancho Cal. Water Dist.California Court of Appeal · 2019

4 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