Prompted by our recent posts on the "special fund" furlough cases in the state's 1st District Court of Appeal in San Francisco, several blog users have called and emailed for the status on the fourth -- and legally distinct -- furlough case, CCPOA v. Schwarzenegger.
This gets a bit complicated, so hold on ...
Unlike the "special fund" cases before the 1st District Court, CCPOA won in the trial court by arguing that cutting their members' pay and then giving them the time off at a later date was a de facto pay cut.
Then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger lost, but the matter in the appellate court technically isn't an argument by the state to reverse a lower court ruling. Because Roesch never issued a final judgment in the case, CCPOA successfully argued that the judge's decision couldn't be appealed and, incidentally, that its members should immediately return to full-time hours and pay.
The 1st District Court agreed, rejecting the state's appeal as improper, but it agreed to hear the case as requested by the state for a writ of mandate that would essentially overturn Roesch's ruling. That kept CCPOA's 32,000 members on furlough.
After last October's landmark PECG v. Schwarzenegger decision upheld furloughs, the appellate court asked CCPOA and Schwarzenegger to update their arguments. (Read more about those arguments here and here.)
Since then, there's been essentially no movement. There is no deadline on the court. Neither side has a right to oral argument.
Observers think that the court may issue a decision any day now, particularly since the 1st District is clearing out furlough litigation by recently issuing decisions in two cases and scheduling a third for hearing in September.