Staniforth

Staniforth v. Judges' Retirement System

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 4, 2014D064111MCalifornia7,563 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mcdonald, J.

Filed 6/4/14 Original version and modification and certification orders (5/29/14) attached

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FAY STANIFORTH et al., D064111

Plaintiffs and Appellants,

v. (Super. Ct. No. 37-2012-00093475-CU-MC-CTL) THE JUDGES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM,

Defendant and Respondent; ORDER MODIFYING OPINION

JOHN CHIANG, as State Controller, etc.,

Real Party in Interest and Respondent.

THE COURT:

It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on May 19, 2014, be modified as follows:

On page 18, in the first and second sentences of the second full paragraph, the

word "July" is replaced with the word "January" so the sentences read:

"Pensioners' motion argued the action pleaded claims on behalf of seven trial

judges whose retirement allowances should have been (but were not) calculated and paid

based on the salary of an active trial court jurist as increased by an uncapped COLA until

January 5, 1981, consistent with the trial court's construction of Olson I. Pensioners also

asserted the…

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.