Source: http://johnmjensen.com/news.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 14:33:02+00:00

Document:
On November 30, 2015, Plaintiffs filed their Second Amended Complaint in the proposed class action regarding Military Service Credit, Airtime, and Industrial Disability case (IDR) against CalPERS that alleges breach of fiduciary duty, rescission, and other relief. The Marzec and Andert cases were consolidated into one. You can read the Second Amended Complaint here. You can read the attached Exhibits, here. The case is before the Honorable Amy D. Hogue in Dept 307 of the Los Angeles Superior Court.
Previously, the Second District Court of Appeal reversed and returned the Marzec and Andert cases to the superior court in a published decision, Robert Marzec et al v. CalPERS et al, on May 5, 2015. You can read the published opinion, here. You can read the Plaintiffs' Opening Brief and Reply Brief, and CalPERS' Respondent's Brief.
The Los Angeles Superior Court has ruled that Plaintiffs can go forward with their class action lawsuit alleging that CalPERS fails to pay interest when it holds or fails to timely disburse funds owed to Members, beneficiaries and others. For more information, go to www.interestclassaction.com.
On October 22,2015, we filed an amicus brief before the California Supreme Court in a related interest case, Flethez v. San Bernardino County Employees Retirement System, Supreme Court Case Number S226779. You can read the amicus brief here.
On December 17, 2009, the California Supreme Court affirmed the $6 million-plus judgment in favor of Karen Matus, the daughter and trustee for the estate of deceased CalPERS Member Clarence Alexander. Read the Appellate Court Opinion here.
Thousands of firefighters, police officers and other safety employees have invested large amounts of their personal retirement funds to purchase military/air time service credit. When they are later industrially disabled on the job, CalPERS transfers the funds to the employers to pay for IDR expenses. The safety employees receive little or nothing for the investment beyond the 50% IDR allowance they were already automatically entitled to.
(1) CalPERS is required to pay additional benefits attributable to military/air time investments because those investments are qualitatively different than the regular contributions made as part of the safety job.
contributions, Members were already entitled to 50% IDR allowances at the time of the military/ air time purchases. CalPERS had a duty to inform Members that the service credit purchases were amending or waiving their existing, vested rights. Because CalPERS failed to do so, class members should have the right to rescind the purchase contracts and get their investments back.
were at least 50 years old and had at least 16⅔ years of service credit before purchasing military/ air time, they would receive full value for their investments.
All three cases were assigned to Judge Anthony Mohr of the Los Angeles Superior Court. Judge Mohr dismissed the first case (Yost v. CalPERS) on technical procedural grounds in April 2011. Plaintiffs lost on appeal. The second case (Marzec v. CalPERS) and third case (Andert v. CalPERS) were both dismissed in January 2013. Appeals of those decisions were recently filed. To read more about the specific cases, click on Yost v. CalPERS, Marzec v. CalPERS or Andert v. CalPERS.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.