This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Litigation

Jul. 17, 2012

Literalism versus equal protection in the California Wage Wars

In Housing Partners I, the court held that because of the way it was funded, a low-income housing project did not fit within either of two exemptions from the Prevailing Wage Law. By Michael F. Wright of Steptoe & Johnson LLP


In Housing Partners I, Inc. v. Duncan, 206 Cal.App.4th 1335 (June 15, 2012) (HPI), the court held that because of the way it was funded, a low-income housing project did not fit within either of two exemptions from the California Prevailing Wage Law, Labor Code Sections 1720 et seq. The opinion carefully parses the language of the exemption provisions and adheres to their fine distinctions between exempt and non-exempt funding arrangements. But it does...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Enewsletter Sign-up