Legal Opinion

Peters v. Sacramento City Employees' Retirement System

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 6, 1938No. Civ. 6022PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

This is an appeal from a judgment granting to petitioner a peremptory writ of mandate requiring respondents-appellants to pay to her as the widow of William A. Peters, a fireman in the employ of the city of Sacramento at the time of his death, a pension equal to one-half of the monthly salary paid decedent at the time of his death based upon the finding that the deceased met his death “as the result of injuries received in the performance of duty” as provided by section 173 (e) of the charter of Sacramento. (Stats. 1935, p. 2511.)

A hearing was had before the retirement board, which…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Madden's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1916
  2. G. L. Eastman Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com.California Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Brightman's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
  4. Tulare Water Co. v. State Water CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
  5. Winthrop v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Bodinson Manufacturing Co. v. California Employment CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Lysick v. WalcomCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
  3. Hecht v. CrookCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1945
  4. Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Co. v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  5. Dillard v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API