Ruggiero

Ruggiero v. Los Angeles City Unified School District

Good Law
109 Cal. Rptr. 417·1973 Cal. App. LEXIS 953·33 Cal. App. 3d 970
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 16, 1973Civ. 40869California2,362 words

Opinion

Opinion

Dunn, J.

In a class action, petitioners sought the issuance of a writ of mandate to require respondents to compensate them in individually minor sums. Respondents’ return to the petition denied most of its material allegations and pleaded various affirmative defenses including petitioners’ fail ure to file a timely claim; respondents also pleaded six counterclaims. The trial court’s judgment denied issuance of the writ, its conclusions of law stating the petition for the writ is barred by the claims statute appearing in board of education rule 1206 and Government Code section 900 et seq. Petitioners appeal from the judgment.

The petition alleges that the named petitioners are employees of the Los Angeles City Unified School District and that they purport to represent “numerous certificated employees of the School District who were absent on September 18 and/or 19, 1969.” Respondents are the school district, the superintendent of the school district, the Los Angeles City Board of Education and its members in their official capacities. At the hearing on the petition, held October 20 and November 29, 1971, the court admitted into evidence the verified pleadings, various…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.