Parties in the furlough lawsuits had until this week to submit their responses to
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's request that the state Supreme Court consolidate and consider the cases as a group, bypassing the lower courts. We're gathering up the court filings and will post them for State Worker blog users.
First up: California Attorneys, Administrative Law Judges and Hearing Officers in State Employment, which opposes the governor's request. The rationale for the union's position starts on PDF page 9 of the 23-page document:
- The furlough cases are not sufficiently important to merit transfer and consolidation.
- The various furlough cases present different legal issues.
- The various furlough cases are in different procedural postures.
- The furloughs will end soon.
- The petition does not seek to review all of the pending furlough cases.
As a backup plan, Schwarzenegger asked the Supreme Court to consolidate the seven cases at Sacramento's 3rd District Court of Appeal. CASE thinks that's also a bad idea for reasons that start on PDF page 19.
Click here to download the CASE brief. This link opens the governor's petition to the state Supreme Court.
IMAGE: www.yolocourts.ca.gov


The Author
About Comments
Reader comments on Sacbee.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Sacramento Bee. If you see an objectionable comment, click the "report abuse" button below it. We will delete comments containing inappropriate links, obscenities, hate speech, and personal attacks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. See more about comments here.