Christoff v. Nestle Usa, Inc., No. 13155242.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court (California)
Docket NumberNo. 13155242.
Decision Date31 October 2007
PartiesCHRISTOFF (Russell) v. NESTLE USA, INC.
67 Cal.Rptr.3d 468
42 Cal.4th 554
169 P.3d 888
CHRISTOFF (Russell)
v.
NESTLE USA, INC.
No. 13155242.
Supreme Court of California.
October 31, 2007.

Prior report: CaLApp., 62 Cal.Rptr.3d 122.

Petition for review granted.

GEORGE, C.J., BAXTER, WERDEGAR, CHIN, MORENO, and CORRIGAN, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
169 practice notes
  • James v. Group, Case No.: 14-CV-1756-AJB-JMA.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of California)
    • December 2, 2015
    ...section is "to prevent employers from passing their operating expenses on to their employees." Gattuso v. Harte–Hanks Shoppers, Inc. , 42 Cal.4th 554, 562, 67 Cal.Rptr.3d 468, 169 P.3d 889 (2007). The duty to reimburse under section 2802 is triggered when "the employer either knows or has r......
  • Herrera v. Zumiez, Inc., No. 18-15135
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • March 19, 2020
    ...whether an expense is "necessary" "depends on the reasonableness of the employee's choices." Gattuso v. Harte-Hanks Shoppers, Inc. , 42 Cal.4th 554, 67 Cal.Rptr.3d 468, 169 P.3d 889, 897 (2007). For example, where an employer is required to indemnify employees' automobile expenses, the empl......
  • Haytasingh v. City of San Diego, D076228
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • July 9, 2021
    ...(Marshall M. v. Superior Court (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 48, 55, 88 Cal.Rptr.2d 891 ; accord Gattuso v. Harte-Hanks Shoppers, Inc. (2007) 42 Cal.4th 554, 567, 67 Cal.Rptr.3d 468, 169 P.3d 889 ), I would hold that the 5 m.p.h. speed limit of section 655.2 applies to every boat owner or operator ......
  • Orange Cnty. Water Dist. v. Alcoa Global Fasteners, Inc., D070771
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • June 1, 2017
    ...or "indemnification" are similarly described as "statutory indemnity" statutes. (See, e.g.,Gattuso v. Harte-Hanks Shoppers, Inc. (2007) 42 Cal.4th 554, 559, 560, 67 Cal.Rptr.3d 468, 169 P.3d 889 ;Daza v. Los Angeles Community College District (2016) 247 Cal.App.4th 260, 265, 202 Cal.Rptr.3d......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
172 cases
  • James v. Group, Case No.: 14-CV-1756-AJB-JMA.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Court (Southern District of California)
    • December 2, 2015
    ...section is "to prevent employers from passing their operating expenses on to their employees." Gattuso v. Harte–Hanks Shoppers, Inc. , 42 Cal.4th 554, 562, 67 Cal.Rptr.3d 468, 169 P.3d 889 (2007). The duty to reimburse under section 2802 is triggered when "the employer either knows or has r......
  • Herrera v. Zumiez, Inc., No. 18-15135
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • March 19, 2020
    ...whether an expense is "necessary" "depends on the reasonableness of the employee's choices." Gattuso v. Harte-Hanks Shoppers, Inc. , 42 Cal.4th 554, 67 Cal.Rptr.3d 468, 169 P.3d 889, 897 (2007). For example, where an employer is required to indemnify employees' automobile expenses, the empl......
  • Haytasingh v. City of San Diego, D076228
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • July 9, 2021
    ...(Marshall M. v. Superior Court (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 48, 55, 88 Cal.Rptr.2d 891 ; accord Gattuso v. Harte-Hanks Shoppers, Inc. (2007) 42 Cal.4th 554, 567, 67 Cal.Rptr.3d 468, 169 P.3d 889 ), I would hold that the 5 m.p.h. speed limit of section 655.2 applies to every boat owner or operator ......
  • Orange Cnty. Water Dist. v. Alcoa Global Fasteners, Inc., D070771
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals
    • June 1, 2017
    ...or "indemnification" are similarly described as "statutory indemnity" statutes. (See, e.g.,Gattuso v. Harte-Hanks Shoppers, Inc. (2007) 42 Cal.4th 554, 559, 560, 67 Cal.Rptr.3d 468, 169 P.3d 889 ;Daza v. Los Angeles Community College District (2016) 247 Cal.App.4th 260, 265, 202 Cal.Rptr.3d......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
  • Expense Reimbursement Policies in the New World
    • United States
    • LexBlog United States
    • July 15, 2022
    ...at this rate, the IRS rate is one acceptable “benchmark” for mileage reimbursements. See, e.g., Gattuso v. Harte-Hanks Shoppers, Inc., 42 Cal. 4th 554 (2007). If employers are not using the IRS rate, they should have a reasoned basis for their mileage reimbursement rate. The expense reimbur......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT