Overview

Overview

HOLDINGS: [1]-Allegations of waiver and estoppel were sufficient to withstand an insurer’s demurrer because a deceased county employee who had paid premiums for a supplemental life insurance benefit while on medical leave and had received confirmation of the benefit, despite a condition precedent that the insurance would go into effect only if an eligible employee was in active service, reasonably could have believed that the supplemental insurance coverage was in place and effective; [2]-Inconsistent allegations did not amount to sham pleading because the amendment did not render the claim implausible; [3]-There was no implied contract under Civ. Code, ยงยง 1619, 1620, 1621, between the employee and the county because local law prohibited the county from providing unapproved employee benefits; [4]-An equitable estoppel claim against the county failed because grave injustice was not shown.

California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. counsels on PAGA Statue of Limitations

Outcome

Affirmed in part; reversed and remanded in part.

Related Post