This appeal by certain former salaried and hourly employees (Employees) of the Memory Products Department (Memory Products) of respondent, Fairchild Camera and Instrument Corporation (Fairchild), from an adverse judgment after a court trial, presents a question of first impression in this state as to the nature of severance and in lieu of notice benefits
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
CHAPIN v. FAIRCHILD CAMERA ETC. CORP.
Docket No. 29866.
31 Cal.App.3d 192 (1973)
107 Cal. Rptr. 111
MARY ANN CHAPIN et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. FAIRCHILD CAMERA AND INSTRUMENT CORPORATION, Defendant and Respondent.
Court of Appeals of California, First District, Division Two.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
March 20, 1973.
March 20, 1973.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Schiller & Rose, Philip L. Grauman and M. Fred Rose for Plaintiffs and Appellants.
Danaher, Gunn & Klynn and Michael Klynn for Defendant and Respondent.
Court of Appeals of California, First District, Division Two.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
