All notes for Subtopic 1401.01000 – In General
|Decision||Description||PERC Vol.||PERC Index||Date|
Santa Ana Unified School District|
1401.1000: GENERAL LEGAL PRINCIPLES; LACHES; In GeneralGenerally, unreasonable delay, by itself, does not establish prejudice for the purpose of laches. Rather, the respondent’s reliance on such delay must have been detrimental in some respect and the detrimental change must have been caused by or at least occurred during the period of the unreasonable delay. Because here, the charging party requested that the case be placed in medical abeyance in January 2009, before the respondent’s witness suffered a debilitating medical condition allegedly affecting his memory, any prejudice suffered by the respondent as a result of witness’s memory loss was not caused by charging party’s delay. (p. 34.) more or view all topics or full text.
1401.1000: GENERAL LEGAL PRINCIPLES; LACHES; In GeneralAn employee discharged from employment by a public employer, is entitled to bring mandamus action in the superior court following the finalization of administrative proceedings. The mandamus action must be filed within a reasonable time following the finalization of the proceeding and once filed, the action must be diligently pursued. If there is delay in prosecuting the mandamus action, the burden of showing that such delay is reasonable or excusable is on the petitioner. However, the finding of unreasonableness alone will not establish the equitable defense of latches. To establish the defense of latches respondent must show that petitioner has acquiesced in the act complained of or that respondent has suffered some prejudice. The prejudice must be caused by the delay and may be of either a factual nature or some prejudice in the presentation of a defense. When a petitioner seeks reinstatement and reimbursement for salary lost, and the public employer has replaced the employee, the resulting double payment can constitute prejudice for purposes of a latches defense by the respondent, public employer. A requirement that a public agency pay money to the retirement fund could constitute prejudice in and of itself for purposes of a latches defense by the respondent, public employer. Fire fighters who delayed (through continuances) their mandamus action for reinstatement for over five years could not prove that the delay was reasonable. Because the City was able to establish that they were prejudiced by the delay, the trial court was justified in finding that latches barred the action for reinstatement. more or view all topics or full text.
1401.1000: GENERAL LEGAL PRINCIPLES; LACHES; In GeneralNo finding of laches because county did not show that the associations unreasonably delayed bringing their actions nor that it was prejudiced. more or view all topics or full text.
1401.1000: GENERAL LEGAL PRINCIPLES; LACHES; In GeneralLaches is an equitable defense which requires both unreasonable delay and prejudice resulting from the delay. The party asserting and seeking to benefit from laches bar bears the burden of proof on these factors. [210 Cal.App.3d at 188] Federal courts have concluded that even extraordinary delay in initiating and concluding compliance proceedings does not raise a laches bar to recovery. [210 Cal.App.3d at 189] more or view all topics or full text.
State of California (Department of Health Services)|
1401.1000: GENERAL LEGAL PRINCIPLES; LACHES; In GeneralSuccessful assertion of the defense of laches requires a showing that (1) Charging Party unreasonably delayed in asserting its claim, and (2) Charging Party either acquiesced in the act about which it now complains, or Respondent relied to its detriment on charging party's conduct or silences; laches not demonstrated by these facts; p. 13. more or view all topics or full text.