Fear Not Law CA Pub. Decisions

SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL 1000 v. DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL ADM

Filed 9/1/06</p> <br /> <p align="center"> </p> <br /> <p align="center"&gt
CA Pub. Decisions
<p>SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL 1000 v. DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION</p> <br /> <p align="center"> </p> <br /> <p align="center"> </p> <br /> <p align="center">Filed 9/1/06</p> <br /> <p align="center"> </p> <br /> <p align="center"> </p> <br /> <p align="center"><u>CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION</u></p> <br /> <p align="center"><u> </u></p> <br /> <p>COPY</p> <br /> <p align="center">IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA</p> <br /> <p align="center">THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT</p> <br /> <p align="center">(Sacramento)</p> <br /> <p align="center">----</p><br /> <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"><br /> <tr><br /> <td width="394" valign="top"> <br /> <p>SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL 1000 (CSEA),</p> <br /> <p> Plaintiff and Appellant,</p> <br /> <p> v.</p> <br /> <p>DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATION,</p> <br /> <p> Defendant and Respondent.</p><br /> </td><br /> <td width="230" valign="top"> <br /> <p align="center">C049936</p> <br /> <p align="center"> </p> <br /> <p align="center">(Super. Ct. No. 04CS01420)</p> <br /> <p align="center"> </p> <br /> <p align="center"> </p><br /> </td><br /> </tr><br /> </table> <br /> <p> APPEAL from a judgment of the <a href="http://www.fearnotlaw.com/">Superior Court of Sacramento County</a>, Gail D. Ohanesian, J. Affirmed.</p> <br /> <p> Katzenbach and Khtikian, Christopher W. Katzenbach; Anne M. Giese and Paul E. Harris, III, for Plaintiff and Appellant.</p> <br /> <p> K. William Curtis, Warren C. Stracener, Kevin A. Geckeler and Christopher E. Thomas for Defendant and Respondent.</p> <br /> <p> The trial court sustained the <a href="http://www.sandiegohealthdirectory.com/">State of California</a>'s demurrer to a union's complaint challenging the state's refusal to permit work site distribution of material supporting a ballot proposition. The court held the union was first required to arbitrate the question of whether the materials were of a â€
← Back to CA Pub. Decisions · Knowledge Base
Lean view · served in 1 ms · full site view