Source: https://trellis.law/ca/issue-type/government-pensions-270/4
Timestamp: 2020-08-15 13:43:15
Document Index: 757533167

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 34171', '§ 432', '§ 425', '§ 12965', '§ 218', '§ 12965', '§ 1', '§34171', '§10100', '§ 11500']

76-100 of 212 results
Enforceable obligation means, among other things: "[Ojbligations imposed by state law . . . or legally enforceable payments required in connection with the [RDA's] employees, including, but not limited to, pension payments . . . . [ ; and a]ny legally binding and enforceable agreement or contract that is not othenwise void as violating the debt limit or public policy." (Health & Saf., Code, § 34171, subds. (d)(1)(C), (E).)
WEN HONG XIA VS GREEN GARDEN TRADING INC ET AL
Items 9-10 are official acts of a government entity and may be judicially noticed under Evidence Code (c). Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Green Garden’s request for judicial notice with respect to these documents. B. Factual Background Plaintiff Wen Hong Xia a waitress at a restaurant in Monterey Park until March 2014. (Wang Decl., ¶ 2; Chang Decl., ¶ 5; Xia Decl. ¶ 7.) During that time, the restaurant was sold to two different corporations, one of which was Green Garden Trading, Inc.
ONSHORE TECHNOLOGIES INC VS LUMATIV INC
Costa’s Disability Retirement On April 20, 2017, the City’s Fire and Police Pension Board granted Costa a Tier 5 service-connected disability pension. Costa Decl. ¶5. 6. The Chief of Police’s Purported Decision On April 27, 2017, the Chief of Police signed the order of execution removing Costa from LAPD service. AR 1. The decision was served by mail on May 3, 2017. 7.
ALL OF US OR NONE LOS ANGELES CHAPTER ET AL VS SANTA MONICA
GOVERNMENT CLAIMS ACT Defendants next argue that all of AOUON’s claims must be dismissed because it never filed a claim with SMMUSD first, in compliance with the Government Claims Act. (Demurrer at p. 5.) Defendants also argue that Doe’s First Cause of Action for Breach of Labor Code § 432.7 and Fifth Cause of Action for Breach of Contract must be dismissed because Doe never named them in his own claim. (Demurrer at pp. 5–6.)
GUSTAVO GUTIERREZ VS LONNIE ROBERT VALENICA
Before Trial ¶ 9:1212, citing Operating Engineers Pension Trust v. A–C Co. (9th Cir. 1988) 859 F2d 1336, 1344.) In other words, the statute, like its counterpart in the federal rules, is reserved for the exceptional case. Defendants move for sanctions on the grounds that Plaintiff’s Complaint is meritless and frivolous and was filed solely to harass Defendants and to waste judicial resources.
ANDREA MAROSI ET AL VS LISA S EHRLICH ET AL
(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), where an action is brought to recover actual or punitive damages for personal injury or wrongful death, the amount demanded shall not be stated, but the complaint shall comply with Section 422.30 and, in a limited civil case, with subdivision (b) of Section 70613 of the Government Code. CCP § 425.10.
REBECCA VENEGAS VS RAY PERRY
Plaintiff Rebecca Venegas (“plaintiff”) moves the court, per Government Code § 12965(b) and Labor Code § 218.5, for an order awarding her attorney’s fees in the amount of $25,900.00 as the prevailing party in this action. Plaintiff also seeks $1,760.00 in costs. “In civil actions brought under [FEHA], the court, in its discretion, may award to the prevailing party, including the department, reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, including expert witness fees.” Government Code § 12965(b).
(e)(7)), as well as for charges for “a specific benefit conferred or privilege granted,” or “a specific government service or product” that is provided[] “directly to the payor that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the local government” (id., § 1, subd. (e)(1) & (2)).
EDWARD MARQUEZ VS LOS ANGELES COUNTY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT
Pension statutes must be liberally construed and applied to the end that the policy established thereby is accorded proper recognition. Dillard v. City of Los Angeles, (1942) 20 Cal.2d 559, 602. Disability and workers’ compensation are related in subject matter and harmonious in purpose. Therefore, courts look to workers’ compensation precedent for guidance when dealing with issues similar to disability pension law. Bowen, supra, 42 Cal.3d at 578, n.4. D. Statement of Facts 1.
Enforceable obligation means, among other things: "[Ojbligations imposed by state l a w . . . or legally enforceable payments required in cormection with the [RDA's] employees, including, but not limited to, pension payments . . . . [ ; and a]ny legally binding and enforceable agreement or contract that is not otherwise void as violating the debt limit or public policy." (§34171, subds. (d)(1)(C), (E).)
RUTH HALLER AS TRUSTEE OF THE HALLER FAMILY TRUST VS. SEWARD
MATT WOLTHER V. SHUBHAM MAHESHWARI, ET AL.
The named plaintiffs in these putative class actions—Matt Wolther (“Wolther”), Iron Workers District Council of New England Pension Fund (“Iron Workers Fund”), and Construction Workers Pension Trust Fund–Lake County & Vicinity (“Construction Workers Fund”)—allege the conduct of defendant Veeco and certain of its officers and directors and certain of the former officers and directors of Ultratech —defendants Shubham Maheshwari, John R. Peeler, John P. Kiernan, Kathleen A. Bayless, Richard A.
Governing Law A surrendered real estate licensee may be relicensed only by petition for reinstatement pursuant to Government Code section 11522. Bus. & Prof. Code §10100.2. When deciding a petition for reinstatement, the Commissioner may consider all relevant evidence, including affidavits. Id. Tier 1 formal administrative hearings by state agencies are governed by the Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”), Chapter 5, Govt. Code[1] §§ 11500-11529.
ARNOLD JONATHAN MOLINA VS GENERAL MOTORS LLC
or retirement plan or a government benefits program, or assets essential to the health or welfare of the senior citizen or disabled person. (3) Whether one or more senior citizens or disabled persons are substantially more vulnerable than other members of the public to the defendant’s conduct because of age, poor health or infirmity, impaired understanding, restricted mobility, or disability, and actually suffered substantial physical, emotional, or economic damage resulting from the defendant’s conduct.”
DR PEPPER SNAPPLE GROUP VS. CITY OF SACRAMENTO
The ballot arguments in support of Proposition 59 explained: “Proposition 59 is about open and responsible government. A government that can hide what it does will never be accountable to the public it is supposed to serve. We need to know what the government is doing and how decisions are made in order to make government work for us.” (Ballot Pamp., Gen. Elec. (Nov. 4, 2004), argument in favor of Prop. 59.) The people’s right to know, however, is not absolute.