Bennett v. Rancho Cal. Water Dist., No. G054617 (D4d3 May 29, 2019)
Collateral estoppel doesn’t apply when, during the first proceeding, the party seeking preclusion bore a lower burden of proof. Here, the prior case was an administrative employee benefits proceeding. In it, the employer bore the burden to prove that plaintiff was not an employee. It did not meet it. But now we’re in a whistleblower retaliation case where the plaintiff bears the burden to prove he is an employee. So plaintiff can’t rely on the defendant’s failure to meet its burden in the admin case for issue preclusion on the employment issue.
Reversed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The Jurisprudence of Signification
Wood v. Superior Court , No. A168463 (D1d2 Mar. 14, 2024). Yes. You can change your legal name to Candi Bimbo Doll if you want to. See Cod...
-
Pollock v. Superior Court , No. B321229 (D2d1 Jul. 31, 2023) Back in 2019, the Legislature amended Code of Civil Procedure § 2031.280 to inc...
-
RSB Vineyards, LLC v. Orsi , No. A143781 (D1d3 Sept. 29, 2017) In this real estate warranty case, the court affirms a summary judgment in ...
No comments:
Post a Comment