Estes

Estes v. Monroe

Caution
120 Cal. App. 4th 1347·16 Cal. Rptr. 3d 616·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 1234·2004 Daily Journal DAR 9232·15 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1422
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 28, 2004C043878California6,295 words

Opinion

Opinion

Raye, J.

The California National Guard terminated a state active duty guardsman after he was paralyzed in an automobile accident. The guardsman, plaintiff Major James Estes, brought a wrongful termination claim against defendant California Military Department, alleging his discharge violated the public policy of the state to provide reasonable accommodation to disabled workers. (Gov. Code, § 12960.) Concluding that the case was not justiciable, the trial court granted the military’s demurrer without leave to amend. We affirm, based not on justiciability but on a deferential analysis of the pertinent statutes as required by the Feres doctrine. (Feres v. United States (1950) 340 U.S. 135 [ 95 L.Ed. 152 , 71 S.Ct. 153 ] (Feres).)

FACTS

We take the facts, as we must, from the allegations in plaintiff’s complaint. The pertinent facts can be simply stated. Plaintiff joined the National Guard in 1988 and was commissioned as an officer in 1989. He held both a federal commission and a commission from the State of California. In 2000 plaintiff accepted a state active duty position with the California Army National Guard as the assistant commandant at Turning Point Academy, a military…

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.