Legal Opinion

Staniforth v. The Judges Retirement System CA4/1

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 19, 2014No. D064111UnpublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

McDONALD, J.

Plaintiff Fay Staniforth filed this action, on behalf of herself and similarly situated persons (collectively pensioners), alleging numerous claims against defendant and respondent the Judges’ Retirement System (JRS). The principal claim raised by pensioners’ action was that JRS had not adhered to its obligations to pensioners under Olson v. Cory (1980) 27 Cal.3d 532 [178 Cal.Rptr. 568; 636 P.2d 532] {Olson I) and, as a result, pension payments stretching back over three decades had been underpaid to pensioners (Olson I claims). This action sought a declaratory judgment…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Lucido v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Schifando v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003
  3. Babb v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Olson v. CoryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Legislature v. EuCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Guy v. Suntrust Bank Holding Co. CA4/3California Court of Appeal · 2021
  2. Staniforth v. The Judges' Retirement SystemCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
  3. Vos v. Sandwood Enterprises CA4/1California Court of Appeal · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API