Rose

Rose v. City of Hayward

Bad Law
126 Cal. App. 3d 926·179 Cal. Rptr. 287·1981 Cal. App. LEXIS 2484
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 18, 1981Civ. 47885California6,201 words

Opinion

Opinion

Miller, J.

This is an appeal by retired public employees from a judgment denying a petition for writ of mandate seeking an order compelling the City of Hayward and the Public Employees Retirement System (hereinafter PERS) to include certain “fringe benefits” in the salary base from which their pension allowances are computed. Appellants also appeal from an order entered by the trial court denying certification as a class action.

The parties have stipulated to the facts of the case. We summarize the relevant facts from that stipulation. The named plaintiffs in this action are a retired police officer and a retired fire fighter and the widows of a deceased police officer and a deceased fire fighter formerly employed by the City of Hayward. Named petitioners have vested pension rights and at the time they filed their petition, were receiving monthly pensions from PERS (the System).

During their tenure with the City of Hayward, both the fire fighters and police officers received an annual uniform allowance, holiday pay, and/or lump sum payment for unused sick leave time. The police officers also received an ammunition allowance.

Pursuant to the state retirement law, by which the city…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.