Adams

Adams v. Pacific Bell Directory

Good Law
111 Cal. App. 4th 93·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 1214·2003 Daily Journal DAR 8989·3 Cal. Rptr. 3d 365·173 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2092
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 11, 2003G029343California2,705 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rylaarsdam, J.

Plaintiffs, 42 employees and former employees of defendant Pacific Bell Directory (employer), sued the latter, claiming its practice of debiting employees’ commissions is unlawful under Labor Code section 221 arid Business and Professions Code section 17200, although it is expressly permitted under a collective bargaining agreement between the parties. The case has been a procedural merry-go-round, if not a procedural roller coaster, for employees. Or perhaps a more appropriate metaphor is to characterize their experiences in pursuing this case as a procedural house of horrors.

Almost six years ago, employees filed their suit in the Orange County Superior Court. Defendant removed the case to the United States District Court, claiming federal law governing collective bargaining agreements preempted employees’ state law claims. The district court agreed with this premise and then proceeded to dismiss the case on the merits. Plaintiffs appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which reversed and remanded the case back to the superior court. After return of the case to the Orange County Superior Court, the trial judge there found that federal law did preempt…

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.