Cal. Grocers Assn. v. City of L.A. 7/30/09 CA2/5

State: California

Court: 1st District Court of Appeal 1st District Court of Appeal

Docket No: B206750

Case Date: 11/12/2009

Preview:Filed 7/30/09

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE

CALIFORNIA GROCERS ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Defendant and Appellant; LOS ANGELES ALLIANCE FOR A NEW ECONOMY, Intervenor and Appellant.

B206750 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC351831)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Ralph W. Dau, Judge. Affirmed. Rockard J. Delgadillo, City Attorney, Laurie Rittenberg, Assistant City Attorney, and John A. Carvalho, Deputy City Attorney, for Defendant and Appellant. Schwartz, Steinsapir, Dohrmann & Sommers and Henry M. Willis for Intervenor and Appellant. Jones Day, Richard S. Ruben, Craig E. Stewart and Nathaniel P. Garrett for Plaintiff and Respondent.

A trade association of grocery store operators and suppliers brought an action challenging an ordinance enacted by the City of Los Angeles that required purchasers of large grocery stores to employ the prior store`s workforce for 90 days. The trial court found the ordinance was preempted by the California Retail Food Code (CRFC), Health and Safety Code section 113700 et seq.,1 based on the Legislature`s express intent to fully occupy the field of health and sanitation standards for retail food facilities. Defendant City of Los Angeles and intervenor Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy (LAANE) appeal from the judgment enjoining enforcement of the ordinance. The City and LAANE contend that the purpose of the ordinance is to provide job security to grocery workers in the event of a change in ownership, and the provisions are unrelated to health and sanitation standards. We conclude that the ordinance requires successor grocery employers to employ experienced workers in order to maintain health and safety standards at the store during the transition to new management. As such, the ordinance enters into a field fully occupied by state law and is preempted. In addition, we conclude that the ordinance is preempted by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) (29 U.S.C.

Download Cal. Grocers Assn. v. City of L.A. 7/30/09 CA2/5.pdf