Kirk

Kirk v. Flournoy

Good Law
111 Cal. Rptr. 674·1974 Cal. App. LEXIS 698·36 Cal. App. 3d 553
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 4, 1974Civ. No. 13825California2,255 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Good, J.

In 1971, plaintiff, who was a superior court judge in Imperial County since 1963, sought to retire at the age of 70 with optimum retirement benefits under Government Code section 75076. He claimed 20 years of service credit: eight on the bench, seven (plus) as City Attorney of Calexico, and the balance from over five years as assistant legal counsel for the Imperial Irrigation District. On July 20, 1971, he filed his election to retire conditioned upon his entitlement to 20 years of service credit under the Judges’ Retirement Law. 1 The State Controller conceded that plaintiff *556 was entitled to the time served as city attorney but ruled that as an assistant legal counsel for an irrigation district he was not a “public legal officer” under sections 75076 and 75030.5 of the Judges’ Retirement Law. and, consequently, not entitled to retirement service credit therefor. He sought a writ of mandate to require the Controller to credit the disputed time to his service record. The "trial court upheld the Controller’s ruling, made its findings of fact and conclusions of law and entered judgment against plaintiff. Plaintiff’s appeal therefrom involves the single issue of whether…

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.