Vasquez v. State of California 5/16/07 CA4/1

State: California

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

Docket No: D046668

Case Date: 08/15/2007

Preview:Filed 5/16/07 Vasquez v. State of California CA4/1

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

CRISTINA VASQUEZ, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Defendant and Appellant.

D046668

(Super. Ct. No. GIC740832)

APPEALS from orders of the Superior Court of San Diego County, William C. Pate, Judge. Affirmed. We have previously published two opinions in this case. In Vasquez v. State of California (2003) 105 Cal.App.4th 849, 851, 856-857 (Vasquez I), we held as a matter of first impression that the State of California (the State) has a duty under Proposition 139, the voter-approved Prison Inmate Labor Initiative of 1990, to enforce a private business's duty to pay wages to inmate employees that are comparable to wages paid in the private sector, given the State's right to a percentage of their wages to defray expenses of

incarceration. We reversed a judgment entered for the State after the sustaining of a demurrer to Cristina Vasquez's taxpayer waste cause of action. The California Supreme Court granted review of our second opinion, in which we upheld an award of $1,257,258.60 in attorney fees to Vasquez under the private attorney general statute. (Code Civ. Proc.,

Download Vasquez v. State of California 5/16/07 CA4/1.pdf