Confidential
Settlement – $0Judge
Court
San Diego Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Janet M. Herold
(U.S. Dept. of Labor)
Jennifer Reisch
(Bryan Schwartz Law)
Defendant
Colin C. Munro
(Carlson, Calladine & Peterson LLP)
Experts
Plaintiff
Cristina Vasquez
(technical)
Richard Drogin
(technical)
Facts
In 1990, California voters enacted Proposition 139, the State Prison Labor Initiative. This initiative provided that for the first time since 1879, private employers could employ prison inmates, but required the employers to pay them wages comparable to those paid to non-inmate employees. Eighty percent of these gross wages may be deducted for Federal, State and local taxes; costs of incarceration; lawful restitution fines or contributions to victims' restitution fund; and support of inmate families pursuant to State statute, court order, or agreement by the prisoner. (See Penal Code Section 2717.8)
Result
The trial court initially sustained the state's demurrer to the taxpayer action. The Court of Appeal reversed the demurrer in a published decision, Vasquez v. State of California (2003) 105 Cal.App.4th 849. The case then proceeded to trial and settled after the second day of testimony. The superior court issued an injunction, requiring the Department of Corrections to obtain updated job descriptions to publish notices of non-retaliation, to collect back wages due, to inform and advise inmates and employers of their obligations under Proposition 139 and to submit to periodic reviews in the superior court to monitor the implementation of the injunction. The court specified the initial period of the supervision as two years, subject to it being extended, and scheduled regular progress hearings on the status of the injunction.
Other Information
The trial court initially sustained the state's demurrer to the taxpayer action. The Court of Appeal reversed the demurrer in a published decision, Vasquez v. State of California (2003) 105 Cal.App.4th 849. The case then proceeded to trial and settled after the second day of testimony. The superior court issued a stipulated injunction, requiring the Department of Corrections to obtain updated job descriptions, to publish notices of non-retaliation, to inform and advise inmates and employers of their obligations under Proposition 139 and to submit periodic reports to the court to monitor the implementation of the stipulated injunction. The court specified the initial period of the supervision as two years, subject to it being extended or shortened, and scheduled regular progress hearings on the status of the stipulated injunction. The court has tentatively awarded attorney fees and costs in the amount of $1,257,259 under C.C.P. Section 1021.5, including some fees and costs incurred when the State was not a party to the action.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390