Schwarzenegger

CALIFORNIA ATTORNEYS, ETC. v. Schwarzenegger

Good Law
106 Cal. Rptr. 3d 702·182 Cal. App. 4th 1424
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 19, 2010A125292California3,596 words

Opinion

Opinion

Defendants Arnold Schwarzenegger, in his capacity as the Governor of California, and David Gilb, in his capacity as the Director of the Department of Personnel Administration (DPA), appeal from an order and judgment granting a petition for writ of mandate prohibiting defendants from implementing furloughs for employees of the State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF). Defendants argue that the court erred in failing to stay this action under the doctrine of exclusive concurrent jurisdiction and, alternatively, that the court incorrectly determined that Insurance Code [1] section 11873 prohibits the Governor from furloughing SCIF employees. We shall affirm.

On December 19, 2008, the Governor issued Executive Order No. S-16-08. The order recites that the state is facing a fiscal and cash crisis and that the general fund deficit was projected to grow to $42 billion over the following 18 months. Finding that "a furlough will reduce current spending and immediately improve the State's ability to meet its obligations to pay for essential services . . .," the order directs the DPA to "adopt a plan to implement a furlough of represented state employees and supervisors for two…

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.