Supreme Court of California Justia
Citation 50 Cal. 4th 1370; 242 P.3d 1020; 118 Cal. Rptr. 3d 95
Ameron International Corp. v. Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania et al.

SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA

NOTICE OF
FORTHCOMING FILING



The Supreme Court has indicated that the filing of a written opinion in the following
case(s) is forthcoming. At the filing time designated below, the filed opinion(s) will be accessible
at the judicial branch web site (www.courtinfo.ca.gov) and copies will be made available at the
Supreme Court Clerk’s Office.

[Generally, the description set out with regard to each case is reproduced from the original news
release issued when review in the matter was granted, and is provided for the convenience of the
public and the press. The description does not necessarily reflect the view of the court, or define the
specific issues that will be addressed by the court.]

AMERON INTERNATIONAL CORP. v. INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF
PENNSYLVANIA et al.

S153852 (A109755/A112856; San Francisco County Superior Court – 419929)
Argued in San Francisco 9-07-10

This case presents the following issue: Does a proceeding before the United States
Department of the Interior Board of Contract Appeals constitute a “suit” such as to trigger
insurance coverage under a commercial general liability policy?

PEOPLE v. FOSTER (RICHARD)
S058025 (San Bernardino County Superior Court – VCR5976)
Argued in Fresno 10-05-10

The matter is an automatic appeal from a judgment of death.

PINEDA (JORGE A.) v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.
S170758 (A122022; San Francisco County Superior Court – 468417)
Argued in Fresno 10-05-10

This case presents the following issues: (1) When a worker files an action to recover
penalties for late payment of final wages under Labor Code section 203, but does not
concurrently seek to recover any other unpaid wages, is the statute of limitations the one-year
statute for penalties under Code of Civil Procedure section 340, subdivision (a), or the three-year
statute for unpaid wages under Labor Code section 202? (2) Can penalties under Labor Code
section 203 be recovered as restitution in an Unfair Competition Law action (Bus. & Prof. Code,
§ 17203)?

Opinion(s) in the above case(s) will be filed on:


Thursday, November 18, 2010 at 10:00 a.m.


The trial court dismissed an insured's complaint seeking recovery from its insurers of defense and coverage costs arising from a federal administrative adjudicative proceeding. A contracting officer determined that the insured was responsible for supplying defective products to the federal government. The insured challenged this decision in an adjudicative proceeding pursuant to the Contract Disputes Act of 1978 (41 U.S.C. § 601 et seq.), resulting in a mediated settlement. Thereafter, the insured brought suit against its insurers for failure to meet their defense and indemnity obligations. (Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, No. 419929, Ellen Chaitin, Judge.) The Court of Appeal, First Dist., Div. Five, Nos. A109755 and A112856, reversed in part and ruled that the insured could recover under certain comprehensive general liability policies that defined a suit as a civil proceeding but that there was no defense or liability coverage as to other policies.

The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeal and remanded for further proceedings. The court observed that the case law interpreting comprehensive general liability policies has defined a suit, absent a definition of the term in the policy, as a proceeding brought in a court of law by the filing of a complaint. Applying the statutory contract interpretation rules in Civ. Code, §§ 1636, 1638, 1639, 1644, 1649, to determine the parties' intent and to resolve ambiguity, the court concluded that in light of the description in 41 U.S.C. § 609(d) of an adjudicative proceeding under the Contract Disputes Act as a suit and the characterization in 43 C.F.R. § 4.107(a) (2009) of the initial pleading as a complaint, the parties reasonably would have intended that such a proceeding was a suit that triggered the defense and indemnity provisions in the policies. (Opinion by Chin, J., with George, C. J., Baxter, Werdegar, Moreno, JJ., and Siggins, J.,* concurring. Concurring opinion by Kennard, J. (see p. 1387).)

Opinion available at http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/archive/S153852.PDF

Opinion Information
Date:Citation:Docket Number:Category:Status:
Wed, 11/17/201050 Cal. 4th 1370; 242 P.3d 1020; 118 Cal. Rptr. 3d 95S153852Review - Civil Appealopinion issued

Parties
1Martinez, Robert (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Kris W. Kobach
University of Missouri, Kansas City
School of Law
4701 N. 130th Street
Kansas City, KS

2Martinez, Robert (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

3Alameda, Daniela (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

4Anderson, Adam (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

5Bilbray, Brian (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

6Bilbray, Briana (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

7Bilbray, Patrick (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

8Bittner, Matt (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

9Bulmash, Michal (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

10Caloustian, Ash (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

11Dallek, Aaron (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

12Davault, Jimmy (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

13Davis, Antwann (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

14Dennison, Arrington (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

15Deutsch, James (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

16Didier, Kellan (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

17Dozeman, Kyle (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

18Drury, Demyan (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

19Goldberg, Dan (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

20Grant, Emily (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

21Hammes, David (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

22Hammes, Mark (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

23Hammes, Steven (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

24Hildebrand, Amanda (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

25Jang, Chaning (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

26Jelsma, Kathryn (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

27Kattija-Ari, Suzanne (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

28Konrad, Joseph (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

29Kozono, Tim (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

30Luong, Onson (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

31Malone-Stratton, Aaron (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

32McDermott, Mara (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

33McMahon, Cory (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

34meguro, Casey (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

35Nass, Scott (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

36Rabie, Justin (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

37Robertson, Corey (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

38Shea, Peter (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

39Smith, Justine (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

40Stratton, Pamela (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

41Taylor, David (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

42Tubner, Soleil (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

43Thomson, Adam (Plaintiff and Appellant)
Represented by Michael J. Brady
Ropers Majeski et al.
1001 Marshall Street
Redwood City, CA

44Regents of the University of California (Defendant and Respondent)
Represented by Andrea Marie Gunn
California State University/Office of General Counsel
401 Golden Shore, 4th Florr
Long Beach, CA

45Regents of the University of California (Defendant and Respondent)
Represented by Christopher M. Patti
University of California, Office of General Counsel
1111 Franklin Street, 8th Floor
Oakland, CA

46Regents of the University of California (Defendant and Respondent)
Represented by Ethan P. Schulman
Crowell & Moring, LLP
275 Battery Street, 23rd Floor
San Francisco, CA

47Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges (Defendant and Respondent)
Represented by Julie Yu-Ping Weng-Gutierrez
Office of the Attorney General
1300 "I" Street, Suite 125
Sacramento, CA

48Drummond, Marshall (Defendant and Respondent)
Represented by Julie Yu-Ping Weng-Gutierrez
Office of the Attorney General
1300 "I" Street, Suite 125
Sacramento, CA

49Reed, Charles B. (Defendant and Respondent)
Represented by Andrea Marie Gunn
Office of the Chancellor
California State University
401 Golden Shore, 4th Floor
Long Beach, CA

50Trustees of the California State University (Defendant and Respondent)
Represented by Andrea Marie Gunn
Office of the Chancellor
California State University
401 Golden Shore, 4th Floor
Long Beach, CA

51Yudof, Mark G. (Defendant and Respondent)
Represented by Andrea Marie Gunn
California State University/Office of General Counsel
401 Golden Shore, 4th Floor
Long Beach, CA

52Yudof, Mark G. (Defendant and Respondent)
Represented by Ethan P. Schulman
Crowell & Moring, LLP
275 Battery Street, 23rd Floor
San Francisco, CA

53A., Alicia (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Bradley S. Phillips
Munger Tolles & Olson, LLP
355 S. Grand Avenue,35th Floor
Los Angeles, CA

54A., Gloria (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Bradley S. Phillips
Munger Tolles & Olson, LLP
355 S. Grand Avenue,35th Floor
Los Angeles, CA

55A., Mildred (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Bradley S. Phillips
Munger Tolles & Olson, LLP
355 S. Grand Avenue,35th Floor
Los Angeles, CA

56A., Marcos (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Bradley S. Phillips
Munger Tolles & Olson, LLP
355 S. Grand Avenue,35th Floor
Los Angeles, CA

57ACLU Foundation of Northern California, Inc. (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Linton Joaquin
National Immigration Law Center
3435 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2850
Los Angeles, CA

58ACLU Foundation of San Diego & Imperial Counties, Inc. (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Linton Joaquin
National Immigration Law Center
3435 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2850
Los Angeles, CA

59ACLU Foundation of Southern California, Inc. (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Linton Joaquin
National Immigration Law Center
3435 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2850
Los Angeles, CA

60Allied Educational Foundation (Amicus curiae)
61American Civil Liberties Union (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Linton Joaquin
National Immigration Law Center
3435 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2850
Los Angeles, CA

62API Equality - Los Angeles (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

63API Equality - Northern California (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

64Asian American Action Fund (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

65Asian American Bar Association of the Greater Bay Area (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

66Asian American Drug Abuse Program, Inc. (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

67Asian American Justice Center (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

68Asian American Legal Defense & Education Fund (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

69Asian Americans for Civil Rights & Egual Equality (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

70Asian & Pacific Islanders California Action Network (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

71Asian Law Caucus (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

72Asian Pacific American Bar Association of Los Angeles County (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

73Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance - Alameda County (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

74Asian Pacific American Labor Alliance - Los Angeles Chapter (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

75Asian Pacific American Legal Center (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

76Asian Pacific Americans for Progress (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

77Asian Pacific Islander American Public Affairs Association (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

78Asian Pacific Islander Legal Outreach (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

79Asian Pacific Islander Parents, Families, Friends etc. (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

80Asian Pacific Islander Youth Promoting Advocacy & Leadership (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

81Asian Pacific Policy & Planning Council (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

82Asian/Pacific Bar Association of Sacramento (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

83Associated Students of Laney College (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

84Association of Mexican American Educators (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Peter D. Roos
META, Inc.
5133 Cochrane Avenue
Oakland, CA

85Bay Area Lawyers for Individual Freedom (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

86Boca, Enrique (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Bradley S. Phillips
Munger Tolles & Olson, LLP
355 S. Grand Avenue,35th Floor
Los Angeles, CA

87Caban, Pedro (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

88California Association for Asian & Pacific American Ed. (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

89California Association for Bilingual Education (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Peter D. Roos
META, Inc.
5133 Cochrane Avenue
Oakland, CA

90California Faculty Association (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

91Californians for Justice Education Fund (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

92Californians Together (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Peter D. Roos
META, Inc.
5133 Cochrane Avenue
Oakland, CA

93Campbell, Collin (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Bradley S. Phillips
Munger Tolles & Olson, LLP
355 S. Grand Avenue,35th Floor
Los Angeles, CA

94Chinese American Citizens Alliance (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

95Chinese for Affirmative Action (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

96Chinese Progressive Association of San Gabriel Valley (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

97Committee for Hispanic Children & Families (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

98Cortina, Regina (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

99Cotina, Kevin (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

100Crowley, Catherine (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

101De Anza College Asian Pacific American Leadership Institute (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

102Doe, Nicole (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Bradley S. Phillips
Munger Tolles & Olson, LLP
355 S. Grand Avenue,35th Floor
Los Angeles, CA

103Dougherty, Kevin (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

104Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Lawrence John Joseph
1250 Connecticut Avenue., NW, Suite 200
1250 Connecticut Avenue., NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC

105Family Bridges, Inc. (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

106Filipino Bar Association of Northern California (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

107Filipino Community Center (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

108Filipinos for Affirmative Action (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

109Guam Communications Network (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

110Hispanic Association of Colleges & Universities (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

111Hispanic College Fund (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

112Hispanic Federation (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

113Hispanic National Bar Association (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

114Hispanic Resource Center of Larchmont & Mamaroneck (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

115Improving Dreams, Equality, Access & Success at U.C. Davis (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Bradley S. Phillips
Munger Tolles & Olson, LLP
355 S. Grand Avenue,35th Floor
Los Angeles, CA

116Improving Dreams, Equality, Access & Success at UCLA (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Bradley S. Phillips
Munger Tolles & Olson, LLP
355 S. Grand Avenue,35th Floor
Los Angeles, CA

117Japanese American Bar Association of Greater Los Angeles (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

118K. W. Lee Center for Leadership (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

119King, U. S. Representative Steve (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Mark Edward Foster
Law Offices of Mark E. Foster
303 Almaden Blvd., Ste. 500
San Jose, CA

120Korean American Bar Association of Northern California (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

121Korean American Bar Association of Southern California (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

122Korean American Coalition - Los Angeles (Amicus curiae)
123Korean Resource Center (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

124Koreatown Immigrant Workers Alliance (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

125Little Tokyo Service Center (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

126Liwanag Kultural Center (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

127Long Island Immigration Alliance (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

128Los Angeles Community College District (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Eric Choi Kim
Los Angeles Community College District
770 Wilshire Blvd., 9th Floor
Los Angeles, CA

129Loyola Law School South Asian Law Students Association (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

130Mission Graduates (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

131National Alliance for Filipino Concerns, Northern California (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

132National Asian Pacific American Women's Forum (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

133National Center for Lesbian Rights (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

134National Immigration Law Center (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Linton Joaquin
National Immigration Law Center
3435 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2850
Los Angeles, CA

135National Korean American Service & Education Consortium (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

136New York State Association for Bilingual Education (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

137New York Immigration Coalition (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

138New York Latino Research & Resources Network (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

139New York State Youth Leadership Council (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

140Nikkei for Civil Rights & Redress (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

141Northern Manhattan Coalition for Immigration Rights (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

142Orange County Asian American Bar Association (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

143Orange County Asian & Pacific Islander Community Alliance (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

144Orange County Dream Team (Amicus curiae)
P.O. Box 1855
Santa Ana, CA 92702

Represented by Belinda Escobosa Helzer
ACLU Foundation of Southern California, Inc.
2140 W. Chapman Avenue, Suite 209
Orange, CA

145Organization of Chinese Americans - Greater Los Angeles (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

146Organization of Chinese Americans - Orange County (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

147Ortiz, Alex (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Bradley S. Phillips
Munger Tolles & Olson, LLP
355 S. Grand Avenue,35th Floor
Los Angeles, CA

148Pacific Asian Couseling Services (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

149Pacific Legal Foundation (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Sharon L. Browne
Pacific Legal Foundation
3900 Lennane Drive, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA

150Pacific Legal Foundation (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Ralph William Kasarda
Pacific Legal Foundation
3900 Lennane Drive, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA

151Pan Asian Lawyers of San Diego (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

152Peralta Community College District (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Patrick Charles Wilson
School and College Legal Services of California
5350 Skylane Boulevard
Santa Rosa, CA

153Philippine American Bar Association (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

154Pilipino Workers' Center (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

155Professional Staff Congress (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

156Quin, Linda Lin (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Bradley S. Phillips
Munger Tolles & Olson, LLP
355 S. Grand Avenue,35th Floor
Los Angeles, CA

157Rivadeneyra, Cesar (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Bradley S. Phillips
Munger Tolles & Olson, LLP
355 S. Grand Avenue,35th Floor
Los Angeles, CA

158San Diego Community College District (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Ray James Artiano
Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz, APC
2488 Historic Decatur Road, Suite 200
San Diego, CA

159San Jose/Evergreen Community College District (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Mary Teresa Hernandez
Garcia Calderon & Ruiz LLP
50 W San Fernando St Ste 330
San Jose, CA

160Santa Clara University School of Law Asian Pacific Students (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

161Santa Clara University School of Law Pilipino American (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

162Seidenberg, Jennifer (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Bradley S. Phillips
Munger Tolles & Olson, LLP
355 S. Grand Avenue,35th Floor
Los Angeles, CA

163Sikh Coalition (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

164Smith, U. S. Representative Lamar (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Mark Edward Foster
Law Offices of Mark E. Foster
303 Almaden Blvd., Suite 500
San Jose, CA

165South Asian Network (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

166Southeast Asian Community Alliance (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

167Southern California Chinese Lawyers' Association (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

168Stanford Asian American Activism Committee (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

169Suarez-Orozco, Marcelo (Amicus curiae)
Represented by George Ruben Morris
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, LLP
2550 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA

170Thai Community Development Center (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

171U.C. Berkeley School of Law Asian American Law Journal (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

172U.C. Berkeley School of Law Asian Pacific Law Students (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

173U.C. Davis Asian American Association (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

174U.C. Hastings College of Law Asian Pacific American Students (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

175U.C. Irvine Asian Pacific Student Association (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

176U.C. Los Angeles Asian Pacific American Law Journal (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

177U.C. Los Angeles Asian Pacific Coalition (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

178U.C. Los Angeles Asian Pacific Islander Law Student Assn. (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

179U.C. Los Angeles Center for Labor Research & Education (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

180U.C. Los Angeles Critical Asian & Pacific Islander Students (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

181U.C. Los Angeles Nikkei Student Union (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

182U.C. Los Angeles Samahang Pilipino (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

183United Cambodian Community (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

184Vietnamese American Bar Association of Southern California (Amicus curiae)
Represented by Jennifer S. Chang
Bird Marella et al.
1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor
Los Angeles, CA

185Washington Legal Foundation (Amicus curiae)

Opinion Authors
OpinionJustice Ming W. Chin
ConcurChief Justice Ronald M. George, Justice Carlos R. Moreno, Justice Joyce L. Kennard, Justice Kathryn M. Werdegar, Justice Marvin R. Baxter

Disposition
Nov 15 2010Opinion: Reversed

Dockets
Oct 27 20082nd petition for review filed
  The Regents of the Univ. of Callifornia and Robert C. Dynes, resps. Ethan P. Schulman, counsel
Oct 27 20083rd petition for review filed
  Board of Governors etc., et al., resp. Julie Weng-Gutierrez, DAG
Oct 27 2008Petition for review filed
  Robert Martinez, et al., appellants by Michael J. Brady, counsel
Oct 27 2008Record requested
 
Oct 29 2008Received Court of Appeal record
  one doghouse
Nov 3 2008Application to appear as counsel pro hac vice (pre-grant)
  Robert Martinez counsel for aplt. submits this motion for Pro Hac Vice admission for Kris W. Kobach to appear for appellants in this case only.
Nov 14 2008Answer to petition for review filed
  counsel for aplts. (Martinez)
Nov 14 2008Answer to petition for review filed
  counsel for Regents of Univ. of Calif. and R. Dynes.
Nov 17 2008Answer to petition for review filed
  counsel for resp. Board of Governor, et al.
Nov 19 2008Filed:
  Errata to Community Colleges' Answer to Plaintiffs' Petition for Review by Julie Weng-Gutierrez, cnsl for rspts Community Colleges
Nov 24 2008Reply to answer to petition filed
  Community Colleges, defendants and respondents Julie Weng-Gutierrez, Supv. Dep. A.G.
Nov 24 2008Reply to answer to petition filed
  counsel for resps. Regents of Univ. of Calif., and Robert C. Dynes.
Dec 1 2008Received:
  counsel for defts. and resps. Certif. of Compliance word count.
Dec 23 2008Petition for review granted (civil case)
  The application of Kris Kobach to appear as counsel pro hac vice is granted. The petition for review filed by respondents The Regents of the University of California and Robert C. Dynes is granted. The petition for review filed by respondents Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, and Chancellor Marshall Drummond is granted. The petition for review filed by appellants Robert Martinez et al. is denied. Werdegar, J., was absent and did not participate. Votes: George, C.J., Kennard, Baxter, Chin, Moreno, and Corrigan, JJ.
Jan 8 2009Certification of interested entities or persons filed
  counsel for resps. (Regents of the Univ. of Calif.)
Jan 9 2009Request for extension of time filed
  by The Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges and Marshall drummond, Respondents, requesting 30-day extension to and including February 23, 2009, to file respondents' opening brief on the merits. by Julie Weng-Gutierrez, counsel
Jan 9 2009Request for extension of time filed
  counsel for respondents requests extension of time to February 23, 2009, to file the opening brief on the merits.
Jan 13 2009Certification of interested entities or persons filed
  counsel for aplt.
Jan 13 2009Certification of interested entities or persons filed
  counsel for resp. Calif. State Univ., Office of the General Counsel
Jan 14 2009Extension of time granted
  On application of respondents, The Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges and Chancellor Michael Drummond, and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time to serve and file the respondents' opening brief on the merits is hereby extended to and including February 23, 2009.
Jan 14 2009Extension of time granted
  On application of respondents and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time to serve and file the opening brief on the merits is extended to and including February 23, 2009.
Jan 20 2009Certification of interested entities or persons filed
  counsel for resp. Board of Governors, Calif. Comm. Colleges
Jan 29 2009Motion filed (non-AA)
  counsel for resp. (Regents of the Univ. of Calif. and Robert C. Dynes) to Substitute Party on Appeal. Mark G. Yudof, current president for resp. Robert C. Dynes, who formerly served in that position.
Feb 5 2009Order filed
  The motion for substitution of party on appeal, filed January 29, 2009 is granted. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.36(a).)
Feb 19 2009Request for extension of time filed
  Counsel for resps. (Regents of the Univ. of Calif.) requests extension of time to 3-25-2009, to file the opening brief on the merits.
Feb 20 2009Request for extension of time filed
  Counsel for resps. (Brd. of Governors of the CA Comm. Colleges and Marshall Drummond) requests extension of time to 3-25-2009 to file the opening brief on the merits.
Feb 24 2009Extension of time granted
  On application of respondents and good cause appearing, it is ordering that the time to serve and file the opening brief on the merits is extended to and including March 25, 2009.
Feb 24 2009Extension of time granted
  On application of respondents and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time to serve and file the opening brief on the merits is extended to and including March 25, 2009.
Mar 25 2009Opening brief on the merits filed
  counsel for resp. (Calif. Comm. Colleges & Chancellor M. Drummond)
Mar 25 2009Opening brief on the merits filed
  counsel for resp. (Regents of the Univ. of Calif. and Mark G. Yudof)
Mar 25 2009Request for judicial notice filed (granted case)
  counsel for resps. (Regents of the Univ. of Calif. and Mark G. Yudof)
Apr 10 2009Request for extension of time filed
  counsel for aplts. requests ext. of time to 5-25-09 to file the answer brief on the merits.
Apr 14 2009Opposition filed
Plaintiff and Appellant: Martinez, RobertAttorney: Michael J. Brady   counsel for aplts. (Martinez) to Request for Judicial Notice
Apr 15 2009Extension of time granted
  On application of appellant and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time to serve and file the answer brief on the merits is extended to and including May 25, 2009.
Apr 16 2009Filed:
  counsel for resp. applcation for leave to file reply and reply in support of Motion for Judicial Notice.
May 15 2009Request for extension of time filed
  counsel for appellant requests extension of time to June 24, 2009, to file the answer brief on the merits.
May 26 2009Extension of time granted
  On application of appellant and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time to serve and file the answer brief on the merits is extended to and including June 24, 2009.
Jun 24 2009Application to file over-length brief filed
 
Jun 24 2009Received:
  from counsel for aplts. over-sized answer brief on the merits.
Jun 26 2009Answer brief on the merits filed
Plaintiff and Appellant: Martinez, RobertAttorney: Michael J. Brady   w/permission
Jul 7 2009Application to file amicus curiae brief filed
  Californians Together, The Association of Mexican American Educators, and the Calif. Association of Bilingual Education (non-party)
Jul 9 2009Request for extension of time filed
  Counsel for respondents Regents of the Univ. of Calif. requests a 43-day extension of time to file the reply brief on the merits.
Jul 10 2009Permission to file amicus curiae brief granted
  The application of Californians Together, The Association of Mexican Educators, and the California Association of Bilingual Education for permission to file an amicus curiae brief in support of respondent is hereby granted. Any party may file a single consolidated answer to all amicus curiae briefs within 20 days after the last date that an application to file an amicus curiae brief may be filed under rule 8.520(f)(2).
Jul 10 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: Californians TogetherAttorney: Peter D. Roos   Californians Together, The Association of Mexican Educators, and the California Association of Bilingual Education
Jul 13 2009Extension of time granted
  On application of respondents, Regents of the University of California, and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time to serve and file the reply brief on the merits is extended to and including August 28, 2009.
Jul 9 2009Request for extension of time filed
  by Board of California Community Colleges, requests until August 28, 2009, to reply brief on the merits, by Julie Weng-Gutierrez, supervising deputy attorney general.
Jul 14 2009Extension of time granted
  On application of Board of California Community Colleges, respondent, and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time to serve and file the Reply Brief on the Merits is extended to and including August 28, 2009.
Jul 17 2009Received:
  Letter dated July 15, 2009, regarding correcting the cover for the Answer Brief on the Merits, Robert Martinez, et al., by Michael J. Brady, counsel.
Aug 28 2009Received:
  from counsel for resp. over-sized reply brief on the merits.
Aug 28 2009Application to file over-length brief filed
 
Aug 31 2009Application to file amicus curiae brief filed
  U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith, et al. in support of appellants.
Aug 28 2009Reply brief filed (case not yet fully briefed)
Defendant and Respondent: Board of Governors of the California Community CollegesAttorney: Julie Yu-Ping Weng-Gutierrez  
Sep 3 2009Application to file over-length brief granted
  The application of respondents for permission to file an over-length reply brief is granted.
Sep 3 2009Permission to file amicus curiae brief granted
  The application of U.S. Representative Lamar Smith, U.S. Representative Steve King, Washington Legal Foundation and Allied Educational Foundation is hereby granted. Answer thereto may be served and filed by any party within 20 days of the filing of the brief.
Sep 3 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: Smith, U. S. Representative LamarAttorney: Mark Edward Foster   U. S. Representative Lamar Smith, and U. S. Representative Steve King, et al.
Sep 3 2009Reply brief filed (case not yet fully briefed)
Defendant and Respondent: Regents of the University of CaliforniaAttorney: Ethan P. Schulman  
Sep 24 2009Application to file amicus curiae brief filed
  Asian Pacific American Legal Center and 80 Asian Pacific American Organizations in support of respondents.
Sep 25 2009Application to file amicus curiae brief filed
  for Pacific Legal Foundation, in support of plaintiff and appellant, by Ralph W. Kasarda, counsel
Sep 25 2009Application to file amicus curiae brief filed
 
Sep 28 2009Permission to file amicus curiae brief granted
  The application of Pacific Legal Foundation for permission to file an amicus curiae brief in support of appellant is hereby granted. An answer thereto may be served and filed by any party within 20 days of the filing of the brief.
Sep 28 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: Pacific Legal FoundationAttorney: Ralph William Kasarda  
Sep 25 2009Application to file amicus curiae brief filed
  Los Angeles Community College District in support of respondents.
Oct 1 2009Permission to file amicus curiae brief granted
  The application of Los Angeles Community College District for permission to file an amicus curiae brief in support of respondents is hereby granted. Answer thereto may be served and filed by any party within 20 days of the filing of the brief.
Oct 1 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: Los Angeles Community College DistrictAttorney: Eric Choi Kim   Los Angeles Community College District in support of respondents.
Oct 1 2009Permission to file amicus curiae brief granted
  The application of Asian Pacific American Center and 80 Asian Pacific American Organizations for permission to file an amicus curiae brief in support of respondents is hereby granted. An answer thereto may be served and filed by any party within 20 days of the filing of the brief.
Oct 1 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: Asian Pacific American Legal CenterAttorney: Jennifer S. Chang   Asian Pacific American Legal Center and 80 Asian Pacific American Organizations in support of respondents.
Oct 1 2009Application to file amicus curiae brief filed
  Orange County Dream Team in support of respondents.
Oct 2 2009Permission to file amicus curiae brief granted
  The application of Orange County Dream Team for permission to file an amicus curiae brief in support of respondents is hereby granted. An answer thereto may be served and filed by any party within 20 days of the filing of the brief.
Oct 2 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: Orange County Dream Team   Orange County Dream Team in support of respondents.
Oct 2 2009Application to file amicus curiae brief filed
  Peralta Community College District
Oct 2 2009Application to file amicus curiae brief filed
  San Jose/Evergreen Community College District in support of respondents.
Oct 5 2009Application to file amicus curiae brief filed
 
Oct 5 2009Application to file amicus curiae brief filed
  American Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California et al. in support of respondents.
Oct 5 2009Application to file amicus curiae brief filed
  Alicia A., Gloria A., et al., in support of respondents.
Oct 5 2009Application to file amicus curiae brief filed
  San Diego Community College District in support of Respondents.
Oct 5 2009Application to file amicus curiae brief filed
  New York State Youth Leadership Council, et al., in support of respondents
Oct 6 2009Application to file amicus curiae brief filed
  Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund in support of Appellant. / CRC 8.25(b).
Oct 14 2009Permission to file amicus curiae brief granted
  The application of San Jose/Evergreen Community College District for permission to file an amicus curiae brief in support of respondents is hereby granted. An answer thereto may be served and filed by any party within 20 days of the filing of the brief.
Oct 14 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: San Jose/Evergreen Community College DistrictAttorney: Mary Teresa Hernandez   San Jose/Evergreen Community College District.
Oct 14 2009Permission to file amicus curiae brief granted
  The application of San Diego Community College District for permission to file an amicus curiae brief in support of respondents is hereby granted. An answer thereto may be served and filed by any party within 20 days of the filling of the brief.
Oct 14 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: San Diego Community College DistrictAttorney: Ray James Artiano   San Diego Community College District.
Oct 14 2009Permission to file amicus curiae brief granted
  The application of Peralta Community College District for permission to file an amicus curiae brief in support of respondents is hereby granted. An answer thereto may be served and filed by any party within 20 days of the filing of the brief.
Oct 14 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: Peralta Community College DistrictAttorney: Patrick Charles Wilson   Peralta Community College District.
Oct 14 2009Permission to file amicus curiae brief granted
  The application of Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund for permission to file an amicus curiae brief in support of appellant is hereby granted. An answer thereto may be served and filed by any party within 20 days of the filing of the brief.
Oct 14 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense FundAttorney: Lawrence John Joseph   Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund.
Oct 14 2009Permission to file amicus curiae brief granted
  The application of Alicia A., Gloria A., Marcos A., Mildred A., Enrique Boca. Nicole Doe, Collin Campbell, Alex Ortiz, Linda Lin Quian, Cesar Rivandeneyra, Jennifer Seidenberg, Improving Dream, Quality, Equality, Access and Success of U.C. Davis, and Improving Dream, Equality, Access and Success of UCLA for permission to file an amicus curiae brief in support of respondents is hereby granted. An answer thereto may be served and filed by any party within 20 days of the filing of the brief.
Oct 14 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: A., AliciaAttorney: Bradley S. Phillips   Alicia A., and Gloria A., et al.
Oct 14 2009Permission to file amicus curiae brief granted
  The application of American Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California, American Civil Liberties Union of Southern, American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego and Imperial Couinties, and The National Immigration Law Center for permission to file an amicus curiae brief in support of Respondents, is hereby granted. An answer thereto may be served and filed by any party within twenty days of the filing of the brief.
Oct 14 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: American Civil Liberties UnionAttorney: Linton Joaquin   American Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California, et al.
Oct 14 2009Permission to file amicus curiae brief granted
  The application of New York State Youth Leadership Council, The New York State Association for Bilingual Education, New York Latino Research and Resources Network, New York Immigration Coalition, Long Island Immigration Alliance, Northern Manhattan Coalition for Immigrant Rights, Hispanic Resource Center of Larchmont and Mamaroneck, Hispanic Federation, Committee for Hispanic Children & Families, Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universites, Hispanic College Fund, Hispanic National Bar Association, Asian Ameircan Legal Defense & Education, Professional Staff Congress, California Faculty Association, Dr. Pedro Caban, Dr. Marcelo Suarez-Orozco, Dr. Carola Suarez-Orozco, Dr. Regina Cortina, Catherine J.Crowley, and Dr. Kevin Cortina for permission to file an amicus curiae brief in support of The Regents of the University of California, defendants and respondents is hereby granted. An answer thereto may be served and filed by any party within 20 days of the filing of the brief.
Oct 14 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: New York State Youth Leadership CouncilAttorney: George Ruben Morris   New York State Youth Leadership Council, et al.
Oct 20 2009Request for extension of time filed
  Counsel for aplts. requests extension of time to November 3, 2009, to file a single response to all amicus curiae brief.
Oct 20 2009Received:
  from counsel for respondents, (U.C. Regents of Calif.) letter in response to appellants request for extension of time.
Oct 22 2009Extension of time granted
  On application of appellants and good cause appearing, it ordered that the time to serve and file the single response to all amicus curiae briefs is extended to and including November 3, 2009.
Nov 3 2009Response to amicus curiae brief filed
Defendant and Respondent: Regents of the University of CaliforniaAttorney: Ethan P. Schulman   (consolidated answer to amicus curiae briefs)
Nov 3 2009Application to file over-length brief filed
  counsel for aplts. R. Martinez, et al.
Nov 3 2009Received:
  from counsel for aplts. (Martinez) over-sized response to nine a/c briefs.
Nov 4 2009Response to amicus curiae brief filed
Plaintiff and Appellant: Martinez, RobertAttorney: Michael J. Brady   (w/permission consolidated answer to nine amicus curiae briefs)
Nov 3 2009Response to amicus curiae brief filed
Defendant and Respondent: Board of Governors of the California Community CollegesAttorney: Julie Yu-Ping Weng-Gutierrez   (to all amicus curiae briefs)
Dec 9 2009Change of contact information filed for:
  Ethan Schulman, counsel for resps. Regents of the Univ. of Calif. and Mark G. Yudof.
Feb 5 2010Received:
  counsel for resp. (People), Julie Weng-Gutierrez Notice of Unavailability for Oral Argument on the dates of April and May 2010, due to maternity leave.
Sep 7 2010Case ordered on calendar
  to be argued Tuesday, October 5, 2010, at 9:00 a.m., in Fresno (at Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District, 2424 Ventura Street)
Sep 14 2010Request for judicial notice granted
  Respondent's motion for judicial notice, filed on March 25, 2009, is granted.
Sep 17 2010Filed:
  Letter from Ethan P. Schulman, counsel for respondents Regents of the University of California et al., requesting to divide oral argument time equally with respondents California Community Colleges et al.
Sep 17 2010Filed:
  Letter from Deputy Attorney General Julie Weng-Gutierrez, counsel for respondents California Community Colleges et al., requesting to divide oral argument time equally with respondents Regents of the University of California et al.
Sep 21 2010Request for extended media coverage filed
  by the Fresno Bee
Sep 21 2010Order filed
  The request of counsel for respondents in the above-referenced cause to allow two counsel to argue on behalf of respondents at oral argument is hereby granted. The request of respondents to allocate to Regents of the University of California et al. 15 minutes and Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges et al. 15 minutes of respondents' 30-minute allotted time for oral argument is granted.
Sep 22 2010Request for extended media coverage granted
  The request for extended media coverage, filed by the Fresno Bee on October 5, 2010, is granted, subject to the conditions set forth in rule 1.150, California Rules of Court.
Sep 22 2010Supplemental brief filed
Plaintiff and Appellant: Martinez, RobertAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Alameda, DanielaAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Anderson, AdamAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Bilbray, BrianAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Bilbray, BrianaAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Bilbray, PatrickAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Bittner, MattAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Bulmash, MichalAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Caloustian, AshAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Dallek, AaronAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Davault, Jimmy, IIIAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Davis, AntwannAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Dennison, ArringtonAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Drury, DemyanAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Deutsch, JamesAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Didier, KellanAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Dozeman, KyleAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Goldberg, DanAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Grant, EmilyAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Hammes, DavidAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Hammes, MarkAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Hammes, StevenAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Hildebrand, AmandaAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Jang, ChaningAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Jelsma, KathrynAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Kattija-Ari, SuzanneAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Konrad, JosephAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Kozono, TimAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Luong, OnsonAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Malone-Stratton, AaronAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: McDermott, MaraAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: McMahon, CoryAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: meguro, CaseyAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Nass, ScottAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Rabie, JustinAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Robertson, CoreyAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Shea, PeterAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Smith, JustineAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Stratton, PamelaAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Taylor, DavidAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Tubner, SoleilAttorney: Michael J. Brady Plaintiff and Appellant: Thomson, AdamAttorney: Michael J. Brady   Letter dated September 21, 2010, from appellants, citing authorities relevant to issues presented in case; by Michael J. Brady, counsel.
Sep 24 2010Supplemental brief filed
Defendant and Respondent: Regents of the University of CaliforniaAttorney: Ethan P. Schulman Defendant and Respondent: Yudof, Mark G.Attorney: Ethan P. Schulman  
Sep 28 2010Note: Mail returned and re-sent
  mail re-sent to address listed at State Bar website.
Oct 5 2010Cause argued and submitted
 
Nov 12 2010Notice of forthcoming opinion posted
  To be filed on Monday, November 15, 2010 at 10 a.m.
Nov 15 2010Opinion filed: Judgment reversed
  & remanded. We reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeal and remand the matter to that court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Opinion by Chin, J. -- joined by George, C. J., Kennard, Baxter, Werdegar, Moreno, and Corrigan, JJ.

Briefs
Mar 25 2009Opening brief on the merits filed
 
Mar 25 2009Opening brief on the merits filed
 
Jun 26 2009Answer brief on the merits filed
Plaintiff and Appellant: Martinez, RobertAttorney: Michael J. Brady  
Jul 10 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: Californians TogetherAttorney: Peter D. Roos  
Aug 28 2009Reply brief filed (case not yet fully briefed)
Defendant and Respondent: Board of Governors of the California Community CollegesAttorney: Julie Yu-Ping Weng-Gutierrez  
Sep 3 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: Smith, U. S. Representative LamarAttorney: Mark Edward Foster  
Sep 3 2009Reply brief filed (case not yet fully briefed)
Defendant and Respondent: Regents of the University of CaliforniaAttorney: Ethan P. Schulman  
Sep 28 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: Pacific Legal FoundationAttorney: Ralph William Kasarda  
Oct 1 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: Los Angeles Community College DistrictAttorney: Eric Choi Kim  
Oct 1 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: Asian Pacific American Legal CenterAttorney: Jennifer S. Chang  
Oct 2 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: Orange County Dream Team  
Oct 14 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: San Jose/Evergreen Community College DistrictAttorney: Mary Teresa Hernandez  
Oct 14 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: San Diego Community College DistrictAttorney: Ray James Artiano  
Oct 14 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: Peralta Community College DistrictAttorney: Patrick Charles Wilson  
Oct 14 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense FundAttorney: Lawrence John Joseph  
Oct 14 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: A., AliciaAttorney: Bradley S. Phillips  
Oct 14 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: American Civil Liberties UnionAttorney: Linton Joaquin  
Oct 14 2009Amicus curiae brief filed
Amicus curiae: New York State Youth Leadership CouncilAttorney: George Ruben Morris  
Nov 3 2009Response to amicus curiae brief filed
Defendant and Respondent: Regents of the University of CaliforniaAttorney: Ethan P. Schulman  
Nov 4 2009Response to amicus curiae brief filed
Plaintiff and Appellant: Martinez, RobertAttorney: Michael J. Brady  
Nov 3 2009Response to amicus curiae brief filed
Defendant and Respondent: Board of Governors of the California Community CollegesAttorney: Julie Yu-Ping Weng-Gutierrez  
Brief Downloads
application/pdf icon
S153852_appellants-petition-for-review-0001.pdf (974939 bytes) - Appellant's Petition for Review
application/pdf icon
S153852_defrespond-0002.pdf (153554 bytes) - Respondents, Insurance Company of North America, Pacific Employers Insurance Company, and St. Paul Surplus Lines Insurance Company, Joint Answer to Petition for Review
application/pdf icon
S153852_appellants-repy-to-answer-to-petition-for-review-0003.pdf (77915 bytes) - Appellant's Reply to Answer to Petition for Review
application/pdf icon
S153852_appellants-opening-brief-on-the-merits-0004.pdf (540995 bytes) - Appellant's Opening Brief on the Merits
application/pdf icon
S153852_defrespond2-0005.pdf (494464 bytes) - Respondents, Insurance Company of North America and Pacific Employers Insurance Company, Joint Answer Brief on the Merits
application/pdf icon
S153852_respondent-old-republic-insurance-company-answer-brief-on-the-merits-0006.pdf (229490 bytes) - Respondent, Old Republic Insurance Company, Answer Brief on the Merits
application/pdf icon
S153852_appellants-reply-brief-on-the-merits-0007.pdf (276269 bytes) - Appellant's Reply Brief on the Merits
If you'd like to submit a brief document to be included for this opinion, please submit an e-mail to the SCOCAL website
Jun 5, 2011
Annotated by dayo fashoro

-Key Players-

Ameron International Corp. Subcontractor to Peter Kiewit Sons' Company. Kiewet was contracted by the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation for the fabrication and installation of concrete siphons used in the Bureau's Central Arizona Project aqueduct. Kiewit subcontracted the manufacture of the siphons to Ameron, and required Ameron to defend and indemnify Kiewit in the event the siphons proved defective.

Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania and 10 other insurance companies. Provided Ameron with commercial general liability (CGL) insurance and excess/umbrella insurance policies from 1978 to 1995.

-Facts-

In 1975, the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation hired Peter Kiewet Sons' Company to fabricate and install concrete siphons for the Central Arizona aqueduct project. Kiewet then hired Ameron to manufacture the siphons, and required Ameron to indemnify and defend Kiewet if the siphons were defective.

In 1990, the Bureau discovered $116 million worth of defects in the siphons. The United States Department of Interior Board of Contract Appeal (IBCA) found Kiewet responsible for the defects and sought $40 million in damages from Kiewet and Ameron. A $10 million settlement was reached.

Only one of Ameron's insurers, Truck Insurance Co., paid Ameron money for the cost of defending or indemnifying Ameron in litigation before the IBCA. Ameron, on its own behalf and on behalf of Kiewet, sued respondent insurers for breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, declaratory relief, waiver and estoppel, and contribution for their refusal to defend or indemnify Ameron against the IBCA. Ameron alleged that because the IBCA proceedings qualified as a "suit" under the Contract Disputes Act, the respondents insurance coverage duties were triggered.

Respondents demurred. The superior court granted their motion to dismiss Ameron's complaint because the court agreed that, under Foster-Gardner, the IBCA proceedings were not a suit that triggered the insurers' duty to provide coverage or defend Ameron against litigation. The Court of Appeals partially reversed, awarding Ameron defense and insurance coverage damages for policies that defined a "suit" as a "civil proceeding" and denying Ameron damages where for policies that did not define "suit".

-Procedural Posture-

The California Supreme Court granted cert to review the definition of a "suit" and determine how the Foster-Gardner rule applies to an IBCA administrative law proceeding.

-Relevant Statutes-

The Contract Disputes Act establishes procedures for parties engaged to do business with the United States to resolve monetary claims arising from contract disputes. It established the IBCA and authorized it to conduct trials, determine liability, and award money damages.

-Relevant Case Law-

Foster-Gardner defined a "suit" as a proceeding brought in a court of law by the filing of a complaint. An insurer is obligated to defend its insured against a suit, but has discretion to investigate claims.

Subsequent cases (Powerine I, Powerine II, Ace Property, etc., linked below) extended the Foster-Gardner rule to the insurer's indemnification duty under standard commercial general liability policies (insurers only obligated to pay damages ordered by courts).

-Question Presented-

Can the Foster-Gardner rule be interpreted to mean that insurer's have no obligation to provide defense or indemnity coverage in an administrative law proceeding before the IBCA? To answer this question, the Court must decide if the federal administrative proceedings before the IBCA qualify as a "suit" that triggers the insurers coverage duties.

-Holding-

The federal administrative proceedings before the IBCA qualify as a suit that trigger the insurer's duty to defend and indemnify.

-Analysis-

The Court begins its analysis by comparing the IBCA complaint requirements to those of the California Code of Civil Procedure to determine whether the IBCA proceedings can be considered a "suit". The Court determines that the IBCA complaint pleading requirements meet the standards for a complaint under the California Code of Civil Procedure (CCR). The IBCA requires the appealing party to file a complaint stating a claim, the contractual bases for such a claim, and the damages claimed. Like the filing of a court complaint under the CCR, the filing of this complaint requires specificity in pleading, and gives the insurer notice of the claim and allows it to determine its duties under the insurance policy. The Code of Federal Regulations also states that the IBCA pleading fulfills the generally recognized requirements of a complaint. The Court also points to Senate Reports to determine that it was the intent of Congress for IBCA proceedings to serve as an efficient alternative method to conduct trials, determine liability and award damages to resolve contract disputes so that the contractor can obtain his day in court.

The Court next turns to the language of the insurance contract to determine if there was a reasonable expectation of coverage for these proceedings and concludes that a reasonable policyholder would believe that a policy covering "suits" would also cover IBCA proceedings. As noted above, the legislator intended the IBCA proceedings to provide contractors with their day in court. In this case, the 22 day hearing, which included witness testimony, would have been recognized by a reasonable policyholder as a suit and Ameron would not have proceeded if it did not expect the defense and settlement costs to be covered by its insurer. Since, pursuant to the settled rules of contract interpretation, any ambiguities in the insurance policy must be construed against the insurer to protect the insured's reasonable expectation of coverage, the Court believes it is reasonable for a policy that does not define the word "suit" to be interpreted to include proceedings before a federal adjudicative administrative agency board.

-Disposition-

The Court reversed the Appeals Court decision and remanded the case back to the lower court.

-Key Related Cases-

Foster-Gardner, Inc. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co., 18 Cal. 4th 857 (1998) (http://law.justia.com/cases/california/cal4th/18/857.html)

Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London v. Superior Court, 24 Cal. 4th 945 (2001) (Powerine I)
(http://law.justia.com/cases/california/cal4th/24/945.html)

Powerine Oil Co., Inc. v. Superior Court,37 Cal. 4th 377 (2005) (Powerine II)
(http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-supreme-court/1305268.html)

County of San Diego v. Ace Property & Casualty Ins. Co., 37 Cal.4th 406 (2005)
(http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-supreme-court/1305281.html)

Lockheed Martin Corp. v. Continental Ins. Co., 134 Cal.App.4th 187 (2005)
(http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1236136.html)

CDM Investors v. Travelers Casualty & Surety Co., 139 Cal.App.4th 1251 (2006)

-Tags-

indemnity
insurance coverage
insurer's duty
administrative proceedings
Contract Disputes Act