Staniforth

Staniforth v. The Judges Retirement System CA4/1

Good Law
172 Cal. Rptr. 3d 151·2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 475·226 Cal. App. 4th 978·2014 WL 2212515
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 19, 2014D064111California7,146 words

Opinion

Opinion

McDONALD, J.

Plaintiff Fay Staniforth filed this action, on behalf of herself and similarly situated persons (collectively pensioners), alleging numerous claims against defendant and respondent the Judges’ Retirement System (JRS). The principal claim raised by pensioners’ action was that JRS had not adhered to its obligations to pensioners under Olson v. Cory (1980) 27 Cal.3d 532 [ 178 Cal.Rptr. 568 ; 636 P.2d 532 ] {Olson I) and, as a result, pension payments stretching back over three decades had been underpaid to pensioners (Olson I claims). This action sought a declaratory judgment that, under Olson I, jurists who served on California’s trial court or appellate court bench during the time Government Code section 68203 provided for unlimited cost-of-living adjustments (COLA’s) were entitled to have their (or their surviving beneficiaries’) pensions adjusted upward based on the applicable COLA for each year, and that the cap on the amount of COLA’s (enacted by legislation that amended § 68203 and took effect on Jan. 1, 1977) could not constitutionally be applied to pensions earned by jurists who served on California’s trial court or appellate court bench during the time that section…

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.