Christoff v. Nestle Usa, Inc.
Decision Date | 31 October 2007 |
Docket Number | No. 13155242.,13155242. |
Citation | 169 P.3d 888,67 Cal.Rptr.3d 468,42 Cal.4th 554 |
Court | California Supreme Court |
Parties | CHRISTOFF (Russell) v. NESTLE USA, INC. |
Prior report: CaLApp., 62 Cal.Rptr.3d 122.
Petition for review granted.
To continue reading
Request your trial183 cases
- USS-POSCO Indus. v. Case
- Espejo v. Copley Press, Inc.
- Sullivan v. PJ United, Inc.
- In re ABM Indus. Overtime Cases, JCCP No. 4502
Request a trial to view additional results
2 firm's commentaries
-
We Have To Pay For What? A California Court Of Appeal Issues Expansive Expense Reimbursement Ruling
...in order to make reasoned decisions about how to manage the issues raised by Cochran. Footnotes 1 Gattuso v. Harte-Hanks Shoppers, Inc., 42 Cal. 4th 554 2 See Kevin Lilly, California Supreme Court Stabilizes the Law in California Misclassification Class Action Cases, Littler ASAP (Jun. 2 20......
-
Expense Reimbursement Policies in the New World
...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......
1 books & journal articles
-
Mcle Self-study: When Remote-work Expenses Must Be Reimbursed Under Labor Code Section 2802
...See, e.g., Grissom v. Vons Cos., Inc., 1 Cal. App. 4th 52, n.3 (1991) (referring to dictionary definition of "indemnify").2. 42 Cal. 4th 554, 562 (2007) (internal quotation marks omitted).3. Cassady v. Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, 145 Cal. App. 4th 220, 229-30 (2006).4. Id.5. 228 Cal. App. ......