Legal Opinion

Adler v. City of Pasadena

California Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1962No. L. A. 26071; L. A. 26070PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchauer, J.

In these two pension cases, consolidated for trial and for appeal, judgments were entered awarding plaintiffs in both cases recovery of sums constituting the difference between “fixed” and “fluctuating” monthly pension instalments, and in the Adler case recovery of certain salary deductions as well. Defendants 1 appeal from those portions of the judgments which allow recovery based on fluctuating pension payments accruing, and of salary deductions made, more than six months prior to the filing of plaintiffs’ claims with defendant city. As hereinafter appears, we have concluded that recovery…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Abbott v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  2. Allen v. City of Long BeachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Farrell v. County of PlacerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Dillon v. Board of Pension CommissionersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  5. County of San Diego v. California Water & Telephone Co.California Supreme Court · 1947

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. In Re Marriage of BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Driscoll v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Brown v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Bayrón Toro v. SerraSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1987
  5. Thomas B. Sawyer v. County of Sonoma and Retirement Board of the County of Sonoma, DefendantsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983

15 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