Uberti v. Farias CA1/2
A167364
| Cal. Ct. App. | Sep 30, 2024Background
- George Uberti was a student at Santa Rosa Junior College (SRJC) and worked as a groundskeeper during 2019–2020.
- Uberti's employment ended in May 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, after which he sought unemployment benefits from the California EDD.
- EDD denied his claim under Unemployment Insurance Code section 1277, citing insufficient qualifying wages because his student wages were excluded per the "student employee" exemption in section 642.
- Uberti appealed, arguing that the exemption should not apply since his coursework was incidental to his groundskeeper work, but lost at both the ALJ and the Board levels.
- Uberti then filed for administrative mandate in superior court, which was denied; he subsequently appealed to the Court of Appeal, primarily contesting notice and the application of the student exemption.
Issues
| Issue | Uberti's Argument | Respondents' Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adequacy of Notice in Admin Proceedings | EDD changed basis w/o notice; focused only on existence of wages | Sufficient notice given; ALJ explained wage exclusion under §642 | No notice violation; process appropriate |
| Exclusion of Student Wages (Section 642) | Exemption didn’t apply—work and study unrelated, so should count | Groundskeeper wages properly excluded as student employment | Exclusion correct under §642 |
| Incorporation of Federal Definition | State law must mirror federal law requiring study–work linkage | State law tracks federal law (3306(c)(10)(B)) not (C)—no linkage | State law interpreted as written |
| Failure to Join SRJC as Party | Not joining SRJC not relevant/adverse impact | Plaintiff failed to properly join SRJC as an indispensable party | No reversible error on this point |
Key Cases Cited
- Sanchez v. Unemployment Ins. Appeals Bd., 36 Cal.3d 575 (Cal. 1984) (review standards for administrative mandate)
- Tafti v. County of Tulare, 198 Cal.App.4th 891 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011) (appellate review of legal questions in admin law)
- Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Public Utilities Com., 237 Cal.App.4th 812 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015) (standards for due process and notice in admin proceedings)
- Lent v. California Coastal Com., 62 Cal.App.5th 812 (Cal. Ct. App. 2021) (requirements for notice and opportunity to be heard)
- Los Angeles Unified School Dist. v. Casasola, 187 Cal.App.4th 189 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010) (waiver for lack of legal authority/citations)