Kim

Kim v. Regents of University of California

Good Law
2000 Cal. App. LEXIS 321·2000 Daily Journal DAR 4361·80 Cal. App. 4th 160·95 Cal. Rptr. 2d 10·2000 WL 486854
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 27, 2000A087430California3,129 words

Opinion

Opinion

Reardon, J.

This appeal comes to us from a judgment of dismissal following the sustaining of a demurrer without leave to amend on a third amended complaint for “wrongful termination and failure to pay overtime.” We affirm the judgment.

I. Background

Under the established rule that we treat the demurrer as admitting all material facts properly pled but do not assume the truth of contentions, deductions or legal conclusions (Aubry v. Tri-City Hospital Dist. (1992) 2 Cal.4th 962, 967 [ 9 Cal.Rptr.2d 92 , 831 P.2d 317 ]), appellant Jo Kim’s third amended complaint reveals the following: Kim was employed by respondent the Regents of the University of California (hereafter Regents or University), a public entity organized pursuant to the California Constitution, beginning November 1970. She agreed to work 40 hours a week with her best efforts in clerical, secretarial and administrative tasks for a specified rate of compensation. Her employment agreement provided “time and a half’ payment for hours worked above 40 in any week, pursuant to state and federal law.

From 1981 onward, terms of employment were subject to collective bargaining agreements between the Regents and her union. Those…

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.