CA · jury_instructions
CACI No. 3704
Existence of “Employee” Status Disputed
[Name of plaintiff] must prove that [name of agent] was [name of
defendant]’s employee.
In deciding whether [name of agent] was [name of defendant]’s employee,
the most important factor is whether [name of defendant] had the right to
control how [name of agent] performed the work, rather than just the
right to specify the result. One indication of the right to control is that
the hirer can discharge the worker [without cause]. It does not matter
whether [name of defendant] exercised the right to control.
In deciding whether [name of defendant] was [name of agent]’s employer,
in addition to the right of control, you must consider the full nature of
their relationship. Y ou should take into account the following additional
factors, which, if true, may show that [name of defendant] was the
employer of [name of agent]. No one factor is necessarily decisive. Do not
simply count the number of applicable factors and use the larger
number to make your decision. It is for you to determine the weight and
importance to give to each of these additional factors based on all of the
evidence.
(a) [Name of defendant] supplied the equipment, tools, and place of
work;
(b) [Name of agent] was paid by the hour rather than by the job;
(c) [Name of defendant] was in business;
(d) The work being done by [name of agent] was part of the regular
business of [name of defendant];
(e) [Name of agent] was not engaged in a distinct occupation or
business;
(f) The kind of work performed by [name of agent] is usually done
under the direction of a supervisor rather than by a specialist
working without supervision;
(g) The kind of work performed by [name of agent] does not require
specialized or professional skill;
(h) The services performed by [name of agent] were to be performed
over a long period of time; [and]
(i) [Name of defendant] and [name of agent] believed that they had an
employer-employee relationship[./; and]
(j) [Specify other factor].
New September 2003; Revised December 2010, June 2015, December 2015,
November 2018, May 2020, May 2021, July 2025*
Provenance
- Source
- courts.ca.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-20
- Edition
- caci-2026
- Content hash
1f5ae334257c9ce62acaf3acb7741f362f5b01d0738856d66d5fcf0c20489c92
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.