Login


Notice: Passwords are now case-sensitive

Remember Me
Register a new account
Forgot your password?
Case Name Mendoza v. Brodeur
Date 08/18/2006
Note It was was premature to require the employee to come forward with evidence to show a triable issue of fact when the employer had not shifted the evidentiary burden.
Citation 142 Cal. App. 4th 72
WCC Citation WCC 31742006 CA
CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE ERNESTO MENDOZA, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. GLENN BRODEUR, Defendant and Respondent. Defendant Glenn Brodeur hired plaintiff Ernesto Mendoza, an unlicensed roofer, to replace his roof. Plaintiff claims that defendant and his handyman, Robert Harris, approached plaintiff and asked him to work on defendant's roof. Section 3352 excludes certain persons from the section 3351 definitions of "employee," and thus excludes them from workers' compensation coverage. In his negligence cause of action, plaintiff alleged: "Plaintiff was hired as an employee by Defendant Brodeur to do roofing work on Defendant's home.

Download full case here.