Metcalfe v. State
Alaska Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WINFREE, Justice.
1. INTRODUCTION
We previously have held that the legislature cannot diminish a, state employee’s accrued retirement benefits.1 We also previously have held that if the legislature diminishes retirement benefits, those affected may choose between their existing benefits and the new benefits.2 The primary issue in this *1170case is whether a breach of contract damages claim can arise when existing retirement benefits are diminished. We hold there can be no such claim. The secondary issue is whether a claim for declaratory and injunc-tive relief against the diminishment of…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Franconia Associates v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Betts v. Board of AdministrationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- State v. AlexAlaska Supreme Court · 1982
- Ransom v. HanerAlaska Supreme Court · 1961
- Opinion of the JusticesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1974
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Hahn v. GEICO Choice Insurance CompanyAlaska Supreme Court · 2018
- Peter Metcalfe, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. State of AlaskaAlaska Supreme Court · 2021
- Faulk v. JELD-WEN, Inc.District Court, D. Alaska · 2024