From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gamble v. Institute for Future

California Court of Appeals, Sixth District
Mar 3, 2011
No. H035294 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 3, 2011)

Opinion


LEA GAMBLE, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. INSTITUTE FOR THE FUTURE, Defendant and Respondent. H035294 California Court of Appeal, Sixth District March 3, 2011

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Santa Clara County Super. Ct. No. 1 08 CV130756.

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION

Premo, J.

It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on February 9, 2011, be modified as follows:

On page 5, the second full paragraph, the first three sentences are modified to read as follows:

Plaintiff signed new letters of agreement in 2001 and 2002. Both agreements repeated that plaintiff was engaged “on a non exclusive basis” as “Director of Strategic Partnerships” and that she was to be “engaged as an independent contractor” and that her “total compensation” was to consist of base pay and commission. Like the 2000 letter agreement, the subsequent letters set forth a detailed compensation schedule.

There is no change in the judgment.

Plaintiff’s petition for rehearing is denied.

Rushing, P.J.


Summaries of

Gamble v. Institute for Future

California Court of Appeals, Sixth District
Mar 3, 2011
No. H035294 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 3, 2011)
Case details for

Gamble v. Institute for Future

Case Details

Full title:LEA GAMBLE, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. INSTITUTE FOR THE FUTURE…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Sixth District

Date published: Mar 3, 2011

Citations

No. H035294 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 3, 2011)