In Laird v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc. (1998) 68 Cal.App.4th 727, the Court of Appeal applied the "integrated enterprise" test--a test derived from federal labor case law--to determine whether a parent and subsidiary corporation could be held liable as a single employer in a discrimination suit. (68 Cal.App.4th at pp. 737-739.) The integrated enterprise test requires an examination of four factors: interrelation of operations, common management, centralized control of labor relations, and common ownership or financial control. (Ibid.) Under this test, however, "common ownership or control alone is never enough to establish parent liability. " ( Id. at p. 738.) In addition, although a court must consider each of the factors, the critical inquiry requires an examination of which entity made the final decisions regarding employment matters. The trial court ruled on certain objections, then added that, "'other than this specific ruling, the court has relied only on admissible evidence.'" (At p. 736.) The appellate court, relying on the statement above in Ann M. v. Pacific Plaza Shopping Center (1993) concluded that "the trial court's statement that it had considered only admissible evidence was not an implied ruling sustaining unspecified evidentiary objections. On the contrary, Ann M. teaches that we must take this statement as an implied overruling of any objection not specifically sustained." (Ibid.)