Modification: Castellanos v. State of California (Protect App-Based Drivers and Services)

HECTOR CASTELLANOS et al.,

Plaintiffs and Respondents,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA et al.,

Defendants and Appellants;

PROTECT APP-BASED DRIVERS AND SERVICES et al.,

Interveners and Appellants.

No. A163655

(Alameda County Super. Ct. No. RG21088725)

California Court of Appeal

First Appellate District

Division Four

Filed April 12, 2023

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION; NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT

Trial Court: Superior Court of California, County of Alameda

Trial Judge: Hon. Frank Roesch

Counsel: Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Thomas S. Patterson, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Mark Beckington, Supervising Deputy Attorney General and Jose A. Zelidon-Zepeda, Deputy Attorney General, for Defendants and Appellants.

O'Melveny & Myers, Jeffery L. Fisher; Nielsen Merksamer Parrinello Gross & Leoni, Arthur G. Scotland, Sean P. Welch, Kurt R. Oneto and David J. Lazarus, for Interveners and Appellants.

DLA Piper, Stanley J. Panikowski and Justin R. Sarno for Former Attorney General of California Daniel E. Lungren as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants.

Eimer Stahl, Robert E. Dunn and Collin J. Vierra for Citizens in Charge as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants.

David A. Carrillo, California Constitution Center, University of California, Berkeley; Benbrook Law Group, Stephen M. Duvernay for California Constitution Center as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants.

Davis Wright Tremaine, Rochelle L. Wilcox and Alexa A. Graumlich for California Chamber of Commerce as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants and Interveners and Appellants.

Holtzman Vogel Baran Torchinsky Josefiak, Alex Vogel, Edward M. Wenger and Andrew Pardue for California Policy Center as Amicus Curiae on behalf of the Defendants and Appellants and Interveners and Appellants.

Willenken, Kenneth M. Trujillo-Jamison for California Asian Pacific Chamber of Commerce, California Hispanic Chambers of Commerce, Los Angeles Metropolitan Churches, National Action Network Los Angeles, National Action Network Sacramento Chapter Inc., National Asian American Coalition, and National Diversity Coalition ("Communities-of-Color Organizations") as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants and Interveners and Appellants.

Baker Botts, Michael W. Ward for Arnold Schwarzenegger as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants and Interveners and Appellants.

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Foundation, Jonathan M. Coupal, Timothy A. Bittle and Laura E. Dougherty for Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants and Interveners and Appellants.

Jenner & Block, Laurie J. Edelstein and Adam G. Unikowsky for Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants and Interveners and Appellants.

King & Spalding, Albert Giang, Jeffery Hammer and Ramon A. Miyar for Marketplace Industry Association, Inc. as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants and Interveners and Appellants.

Buchalter, Steven G. Churchwell and Berit Elam for Daniel Schnur, T. Anthony Quinn and Robert M. Stern as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants and Interveners and Appellants.

weintraub tobin chediak coleman grodin, Brendan J. Begley for Independent Drivers Alliance of California, Kelly Rickert, Ali Mazhin and Stephanie Whitfield as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants and Interveners and Appellants.

Olson Remcho, Robin B. Johansen, Richard R. Rios, Deborah B. Caplan, Benjamin N. Gevercer; Altshuler Berzon, Stephen P Berzon, Scott A. Kronland, Stacey M. Leyton, Juhyung Harold Lee for Plaintiffs and Respondents Hector Castellanos, Joseph Delgado, Saori Okawa and Michael Robinson.

Service Employees International Union, Nicole G. Berner and Steven K. Ury for Plaintiff and Respondent Service Employees International Union.

Richard L. Hasen; Public Counsel, Mark D. Rosenbaum and Kathryn Eidmann for California Election Law Professors as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Respondents.

Hina B. Shah, Women's Employment Rights Clinic, Golden Gate University School of Law Benjamin Beach, PowerSwitch Action; Nayantara Mehta and Brian Chen, National Employment Law Project, for Gig Workers Rising, Mobile Workers Alliance, Rideshare Drivers United-California, We Drive Progress, A Better Balance, ACCE Institute, Action Center on Race & the Economy, Asian Americans Advancing Justice - Los Angeles, Bet Tzedek, California Employment Lawyers Association, California Immigrant Policy Center, Centro Legal de la Raza, Chinese Progressive Association, Economic Policy Institute, Jobs With Justice Education Fund and Jobs With Justice San Francisco, Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area, Legal Aid at Work, Los Angeles Black Worker Center, Maintenance Cooperation Trust Fund, National Black Worker Center, National Council for Occupational Safety and Health, National Domestic Workers Alliance, National Employment Law Project, Pilipino Workers Center, PowerSwitch Action, Public Rights Project, Santa Clara County Wage Theft Coalition, Women's Employment Rights Clinic of Golden Gate University School of Law and Worksafe, as Amici Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Respondents.

Bush Gottlieb, Julie Gutman Dickinson, Hector De Haro, and Luke Taylor for International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 848 and The Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO, as Amici Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Respondents.

City of San Francisco, David Chiu, City Attorney, Sara J. Eisenberg, Chief of Complex and Affirmative Litigation, and Molly J. Alarcon Deputy City Attorney; City of Oakland, Barbara J. Parker, City Attorney, Maria Bee, Chief Assistant City Attorney, Zoe Savitsky, Supervising Deputy City Attorney and Katherine Read, Fellowship Attorney; City of Los Angeles, Michael N. Feuer, City Attorney, Kathleen Kenealy, Chief Assistant City Attorney, and Michael J. Bostrom, Senior Assistant City Attorney for the Cities of San Francisco, Oakland and Los Angeles as Amici Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Respondents.

Eric M. Overholt and Andrew W. Lockard for California Applicants' Attorneys Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Respondents.

Catherine L. Fisk, University of California, Berkeley; Veena Dubal and Joseph Grodin, Emeritus Professor of Law, University of California, Hastings College of Law, for Labor Law Professors Sameer Ashar, Veena Dubal, Catherine Fisk, Charlotte Garden, Joseph Grodin, William B. Gould IV, Stephen Lee, Sanjukta Paul, Leticia Saucedo, Reuel Schiller, Katherine Stone and Noah D. Zatz as Amici Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Respondents.

THE COURT^*:

The concurrence and dissent to this opinion filed on March 13, 2023, is modified as follows:

1.      On page 18 of the concurrence and dissent, in second full paragraph (which begins: "The deficiency I see here is structural."), in the last sentence of text, change the state constitutional reference at the end of that sentence from "article XIV, section 4" to "article XII, section 5" so the sentence reads:

Because voter "electors" and the "Legislature" share the police power, they may each legislate on the subject of workers' compensation, which is why our Supreme Court has held that the article II, section 8(a) power to adopt initiative statutes is "encompass[ed]" within the Legislature's article XII, section 5 power.

2.      On page 20 of the concurrence and dissent, in the partial paragraph at the top of the page, delete the phrase "workers' compensation matters" and insert in its place the phrase "matters falling within the scope of that provision" so that it reads:

pointed out that the electors' ability to adopt statutes by initiative is a "similar power" to that of the Legislature under article XII, section 5 (McPherson, supra, 38 Cal.4th at p. 1033), not that the electors are "the Legislature" when they legislate on matters falling within the scope of that provision, having simply stepped into the shoes of the Legislature, clothed with article XII, section 5, authority.

3.      On page 43 of the concurrence and dissent, in the first full paragraph (which begins: "Disagreeing with me on this point, . . ."), in the last sentence of text, change the word "appeared" to "appears" so that it reads:

Nor do these cases give any reason for why the binding effect clause should be read as an implicit partial definition of "employer," a term that appears nowhere in the constitutional language and was already fully defined in the statutory scheme the voters ratified in 1918.

The modifications effect no change in the judgment.

^* Brown, P. J., Streeter, J., Pollak, J. (Retired Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division Four, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution).