Gilb

Gilb v. Chiang

Good Law
111 Cal. Rptr. 3d 822·186 Cal. App. 4th 444·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 1037·16 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 616
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 2, 2010C061947California10,686 words

Opinion

Opinion

Sims, J.

The main issue in this appeal is whether California’s Department of Personnel Administration (DPA) has authority to direct the State Controller temporarily to defer paying state employees’ salaries (except for federally mandated minimum wages) when appropriations are unavailable due to the state Legislature’s failure to enact a timely state budget. (Gov. Code, § 12440.) Although DPA merely sought to implement a California Supreme Court decision (White v. Davis (2003) 30 Cal.4th 528 [ 133 Cal.Rptr.2d 648 , 68 P.3d 74 ]), the controller disagrees with DPA’s interpretation of the judicial opinion.

Plaintiffs DPA and its director David A. Gilb (collectively, DPA) sought declaratory and other relief against defendants State Controller John Chiang and the Office of State Controller (collectively, the Controller). Various state employee groups intervened in support of the Controller.

Despite “technical mootness” of this lawsuit after the Legislature passed the budget for fiscal year 2008-2009, the trial court issued a declaratory judgment concluding DPA acted within its authority. The Controller and interveners appeal.

We shall conclude the trial court did not erroneously…

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.