Supreme Court of California

In a case challenging the validity of a provision contained in a memorandum of understanding between the State of California and defendant-state employee union, which restricts the use of private contractors for architectural and engineering services by public agencies, a court of appeals judgment invalidating the provision is affirmed where the provision fatally conflicts with Proposition 35 as the initiative was construed in Professional Engineers in California Government v. Kempton, 40 Cal.4th 1016 (2007).

Appellate Information

• Decided 11/05/2007
• Published 11/05/2007

Judges

• MORENO, J.

Court

• Supreme Court of California

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Law Office of Kelley Stimpel Martinez, Kelley Stimpel Martinez, Sacramento;  Law Offices of James E. McGlamery and James E. McGlamery, Sacramento, of Defendant and Appellant., Olson, Hagel & Fishburn, Deborah B. Caplan, N. Eugene Hill, Sacramento, and William B. Tunick for Don Perata, President Pro Tempore of the State Senate and Fabian Nunez, Speaker of the State Assembly as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Appellant., Stoel Rives and James P. Corn for Plaintiffs and Respondents., Bill Lockyer and Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorneys General, James M. Humes, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Louis R, Mauro and Stacy Boulware Eurie, Assistant Attorneys General, Christopher E. Krueger, Catherine A. Van Aken, Vickie Pochelle Whitney and Leslie R. Lopez, Deputy Attorneys General, for California Department of Transportation as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Respondents.