Bunnett

Bunnett v. Regents of University of California

Good Law
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 520·35 Cal. App. 4th 843·41 Cal. Rptr. 2d 567
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 9, 1995H011983California3,409 words

Opinion

Opinion

Premo, J.

Plaintiff Professor Joseph Bunnett sued his employer, defendant Regents of the University of California (hereafter, the University), for breach of contract, rescission, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing after defendant denied his application to participate in the “Plus 5” voluntary early retirement incentive program because he was already enrolled in the phased retirement program (hereafter, Phased Retirement). The trial court rendered judgment for defendant following orders granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment (as to contract and rescission) and sustaining demurrers (as to fiduciary duty and covenant). We affirm the judgment.

Scope of Review

The essence of plaintiff’s breach of contract, fiduciary duty, and covenant claims is that defendant breached the terms of the contract enrolling plaintiff in Phased Retirement by denying his later application to participate in Plus 5. Thus, the causes of action are no more than challenges to the administrative decision of a state agency.

The proper method of obtaining judicial review of most public agency decisions is by instituting a proceeding for a writ of mandate.…

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.