Legal Opinion

Herrick v. State of California

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 23, 1983No. Civ. 67339PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

JOHNSON, J.

Plaintiffs are participants in the State of California deferred compensation plan. The essence of their complaint is that the method by which the state assesses and collects the administrative costs of the plan from the participants violates the fiduciary duty owed to the participants by the state as trustee of the deferred compensation funds and violates the terms of the plan itself.

The trial court ruled that no trust relationship existed between the state and the plan participants and that the method of assessing and collecting administrative costs did not violate the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Hansen v. Bear Film Co.California Supreme Court · 1946
  2. Valdes v. CoryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1983
  3. Stillwell v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  4. Ernest Fleshman, on Behalf of Lisa Fleshman v. Margaret M. Heckler, Secretary of Health and Human ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983
  5. Eaton v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Gilbert v. Osburn (In Re Osburn)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · 1986
  2. In Re Imperial Ins. Co.California Court of Appeal · 1984
  3. Weststeyn Dairy 2 v. Eades Commodities Co.District Court, E.D. California · 2003
  4. Segovia v. ShoenmannDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2009
  5. Bunner v. California Insurance Guarantee Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1984

4 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