Skip to comments.CALIFORNIA: Supreme Court rejects Schwarzenegger furlough consolidation
Posted on 04/22/2010 1:01:24 PM PDT by SmithL
The California Supreme Court has rejected Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's request that it take up seven key furlough lawsuits now in two appellate courts and freeze more than a dozen others in trial courts around the state. The decision ends the possibility for a relatively quick resolution to about two dozen furlough lawsuits in courts around the state.
The court posted the decision on its website this morning: "The application to transfer and consolidate appeals now pending in the Court of Appeal to this court is denied." Justice Joyce Kennard dissented.
Schwarzenegger is embroiled in 25 active lawsuits in various stages of litigation in courts from Sacramento to Los Angeles. On Mar. 2, his attorneys asked the state's high court to consolidate and review seven cases related to the governor's furlough authority, . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
Arnie should just tell them all to go suck an egg and then resign.
That is not a bad idea. All heck is going to break loose in CA and his resignation would just make it happen sooner.
This means what?
And the road to hell is exactly what Marxist Democrats are following across all of the United States.
Dig up the lawn and plant potatoes
It means the California Supreme Court will rule on the legality of the forced furloughs later than sooner. The longer the furlough days go on without a ruling, the more exposure California has to paying back pay to the employees.
IF the California Supreme Court rules the furloughs are illegal and IF they rule that the State of California must pay back-pay to all of the employees who were illegally furloughed, then the longer the ruling takes, the more free days off from work the employees are getting.
The California Supreme Court will rule on this eventually, but a sooner ruling settles things. Arnold does not a sooner ruling. He is hoping to ride out of town without any ruling. Then if a huge back payment is required, it won’t come on his watch. He is just trying to get through his last state budget cycle with the least pain.
I forgot to add that the case is before the appeals courts now so this means the case will have to exhaust appeals before being kicked up to the California Supreme Court. Had they taken the case now, then it would have sped up the ruling significantly, skipping over the appeals process.
They are going by the book and letting the cases filter up through appeals.
The lawsuits proceed in various courts at the normal glacial pace rather than being consolidated and quickly resolved in one action. Think of it as Chinese water torture.
This should be interesting, Cali is broke so what are they going to do? I smell a court ordered tax increase coming down the pike.
California will go millions and millions more into debt paying for lawyers to jabber back and forth while the State accelerates down the financial crapper.
He should hire an army of lawyers and drag out the lawsuits for years to come. The lawsuits are self funding with the un paid wages of the furloughed workers.
He should force a strike
Schwarzenegger is embroiled in 25 active lawsuits in various stages of litigation in courts from Sacramento to Los Angeles. On Mar. 2, his attorneys asked the state's high court to consolidate and review seven cases related to the governor's furlough authority...Thanks SmithL.
Actually that is a good point. If the blue states all go belly up financially, the red state will have all the financial clout.
The only caveat is, those in the blue states would have even more incentive to vote for outright communism, paid for by the financially healthy red states.
The California furloughs were temporary and are slated to end in June. there are no furloughs scheduled after June 1, 2010.
I typoed that.
The furloughs end June 30, 2010. No furloughs after July 1, 2010.
I am a little befuddled by the Court’s decision to not consolidate the cases. The unions are going bankrupt the State, one way or the other.