Molina

Molina v. Board of Administration

Good Law
132 Cal. Rptr. 3d 435·200 Cal. App. 4th 53·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 1328·2011 WL 4491809
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 29, 2011No. B222370California6,167 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Croskey, J.

*56 Opinion

Phillip Molina (Molina) appeals from a judgment denying his petition for a writ of mandate (Code Civ. Proc., § 1094.5). By that petition, Molina had sought to compel the inclusion in the calculation of his retirement pension all, or at least some portion of, the settlement proceeds received in the negotiated resolution of his wrongful termination action against the City of Oxnard. Because we agree with the trial court that (1) given the explicit language of the integrated settlement agreement between Molina and the City of Oxnard, the settlement proceeds constitute neither “payrate” nor “special compensation” and therefore are not taken into consideration as “compensation eamable” for purposes of Molina’s “final compensation” and (2) under applicable state law, such settlement proceeds may thus not be legally utilized to increase Molina’s pension benefits, we will affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In November of 1999, Molina was terminated from his employment as the Director of Finance and Administrative Services of the City of Oxnard (Oxnard). He is a certified public accountant and, for over 18 years, he had been employed by various public…

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.