California Labor Code Sections 1165-1165.4
CHAPTER 7. SUITS INVOLVING EMPLOYERS AND LABOR ORGANIZATIONSCode Resources
California Resources
California Website
California Governor
California Legislature
California Courts
Search this Code
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
SECTION 1165-1165.4
1165. (a) Suits for violation of contracts between an agricultural employer and an agricultural labor organization representing agricultural employees, as defined in this part, or between any such labor organizations, may be brought in any superior court having jurisdiction of the parties, without respect to the amount in controversy. (b) Any agricultural labor organization which represents agricultural employees and any agricultural employer shall be bound by the acts of its agents. Any such labor organization may sue or be sued as an entity and in behalf of the employees whom it represents in the courts of this state. Any money judgment against a labor organization in a superior court shall be enforceable only against the organization as an entity and against its assets, and shall not be enforceable against any individual member or his assets. 1165.2. For the purpose of this part, the superior court shall have jurisdiction over a labor organization in this state if such organization maintains its principal office in this state, or if its duly authorized officers or agents are engaged in representing or acting for employee members. 1165.3. The service of summons, subpoena, or other legal process of any superior court upon an officer or agent of a labor organization, in his capacity as such, shall constitute service upon the labor organization. 1165.4. For the purpose of this part, in determining whether any person is acting as an agent of another person so as to make such other person responsible for his acts, the question of whether the specific acts performed were actually authorized or subsequently ratified shall not be controlling.