Police Pension Board of City of Phoenix v. Warren
Arizona Supreme Court
1DissentLockwood, Chief Justice
I cannot agree with the reasoning or conclusion reached by the majority of the court.
The factual situation set out in their opinion is essentially correct, but fails to include the fact that appellee did at some time offer to “contribute a sum of money equal to the difference between the retirement deduction to which her salary had been subjected and the regular police pension deduction.” Likewise during her employment she did question the fact that her deductions were not the same as those for other members of the police department, but was advised “not to bring it up”.
Appellant’s claim for…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Luhrs v. City of PhoenixArizona Supreme Court · 1938
- Garrison v. LukeArizona Supreme Court · 1938
- Ernst v. CollinsArizona Supreme Court · 1956
- Dempsey v. AlberSupreme Court of Iowa · 1931
- Perkins v. HughesArizona Supreme Court · 1939
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.