News For -

Update on Purchase of Service Credit Litigation

Date: Jun 17, 2016 Categories: Litigation, Purchase of Service (PSC)

In March 2016, the Court of Appeal affirmed the Superior Court’s rulings in favor of SDCERS with one exception related to Safety Members in the Lenhart action. Except for the Lenhart plaintiffs, the plaintiffs appealed the Court of Appeal’s ruling against them to the California Supreme Court. In mid-June, the Supreme Court denied review of the Court of Appeal’s ruling, which effectively ends the litigation of the appealed cases. More...

Update on 2010 Purchase of Service Credit Correction Ruling

Date: Apr 22, 2016 Categories: Litigation

In 2010, the California Fourth District Court of Appeal ordered SDCERS to correct certain underfunded purchases of service credit. Subsequently, several members filed lawsuits against SDCERS for correcting those purchases. The Superior Court found in favor of SDCERS in several of those lawsuits, and the plaintiffs appealed those rulings. This month, the Court of Appeal issued its rulings, affirming the Superior Court’s rulings in favor of SDCERS with one exception related to Safety Members. That one exception will return to the Superior Court for further proceedings. SDCERS is committed to following the court’s rulings and will keep you updated on further developments. To view the two recent rulings, click here and see the latest Court of Appeal Rulings listed under Abbe vs. SDCERS and City of San Diego and under Baidya vs. SDCERS. More...

Judge Rules in Favor of SDCERS in Purchase of Service Litigation

Date: Jun 20, 2014 Categories: Litigation, Press Release, Purchase of Service (PSC)

Judge Prager has granted SDCERS’ Motion for Summary Judgment in the Purchase of Service (PSC) Corrections Litigation. The PSC Corrections litigation involves nine lawsuits filed by City and Airport employees with PSC contracts affected by a 2010 Court of Appeal decision relating to underpricing of purchase of service contracts for “air time.” More...

SDCERS, City Settle Substantially Equal Lawsuit

Date: Feb 21, 2014 Categories: Litigation, Press Release

The San Diego City Employees’ Retirement System's (SDCERS) settlement agreement with the City of San Diego in the Substantially Equal lawsuit was approved by Judge Zimmerman today, marking the first time in more than a decade that there is no open litigation between SDCERS and the City. More...

Detroit's Bankruptcy Ruling and its Relevance to SDCERS

Date: Dec 05, 2013 Categories: Litigation, Retirement Resources

The recent bankruptcy ruling in Detroit has generated considerable speculation about its potential impact on pension benefits for California public employees. SDCERS expects no immediate threat to member pension benefits as a result of the Detroit ruling, nor is there any indication of such a threat in the foreseeable future. More...

SDCERS, City Reach Agreement on Substantially Equal Lawsuit

Date: Nov 25, 2013 Categories: Litigation, Press Release

The San Diego City Employees’ Retirement System (SDCERS) today announced it has reached a settlement agreement with the City of San Diego in the Substantially Equal lawsuit. While there was no final judgment from the court, the settlement lets stand SDCERS’ decades-long application of the "substantially equal" requirement of the City Charter, puts an end to years of litigious spending and marks the first time in more than a decade that there is no open litigation between SDCERS and the City. More...

After DOMA and Prop 8: Impacts of the Supreme Court’s Decisions on SDCERS Benefits

Date: Aug 06, 2013 Categories: Litigation

The U.S. Supreme Court declared the federal Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 (DOMA) unconstitutional on June 26, 2013. On the same day, the Court determined that challenges of the California Supreme Court’s decision on California’s Proposition 8 did not have standing. This leaves the California Supreme Court’s ruling that Proposition 8’s declaration that marriage can only occur between a man and a woman as unconstitutional intact. While it will take time to determine the full consequences of these rulings, they will have an impact on the tax treatment of benefits paid by SDCERS to members of same-sex marriages.   More...

Substantially Equal Trial Postponed

Date: Jul 03, 2013 Categories: Litigation

Judge Zimmerman granted a postponement of the Substantially Equal lawsuit today, following a request by SDCERS and the City of San Diego. The trial had been set to begin July 9 but has now been postponed. A Status Conference is currently set for September 26 to schedule a new trial date. More...

Goldsmith Withdraws Motion for Summary Judgment in UAL Substantially Equal Case

Date: May 28, 2013 Categories: Litigation

The San Diego City Employees’ Retirement System (SDCERS) today received a Notice of Withdrawal of Motion for Summary Judgment from City Attorney Jan Goldsmith’s office in the UAL Substantially Equal case, effectively demonstrating SDCERS’ strong position in this matter. The City’s motion was scheduled to be heard before a judge on Monday, April 8th. More...

Mayor Filner, SDCERS Urge City Attorney to Drop Frivolous Lawsuit Costing Taxpayers Millions

Date: Apr 12, 2013 Categories: Litigation, Press Release

Mayor Bob Filner and San Diego City Employees’ Retirement System Board President Herb Morgan today publicly urged City Attorney Jan Goldsmith to drop the City’s lawsuit against the Retirement System, calling the case a waste of taxpayer dollars More...

"Sub Equal" Trial Continued to July

Date: Apr 11, 2013 Categories: Litigation

Judge Joseph Zimmerman, the presiding judge for the UAL “Substantially Equal” case between the City of San Diego and the San Diego City Employees’ Retirement System (SDCERS), has announced that the trial date will be continued to July from its previously scheduled date in May. The trial will now begin on Tuesday, July 9th, at 10:00 a.m. at the San Diego Superior Court, 220 W. Broadway, on the fourth floor. More...

Judge Rules in Support of SDCERS in UAL Substantially Equal Case

Date: Dec 05, 2012 Categories: Litigation

Judge Joseph Zimmerman yesterday ruled in support of the San Diego City Employees’ Retirement System (SDCERS) in the UAL Substantially Equal case, denying the City of San Diego’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings on both procedural grounds and on the merits. More...

Court Issues Ruling on SDCERS' Change of Venue Request for Substantially Equal Case

Date: Nov 15, 2011 Categories: Litigation

In an unpublished opinion filed on November 10, 2011, the Court of Appeals (Court) issued its ruling on SDCERS' Motion to Change Venue in the Substantially Equal Case. More...

City Council Approves Ordinance Removing SDCERS' Authority to Settle Litigation

Date: Sep 15, 2011 Categories: Board, Litigation

The San Diego City Council has approved an ordinance designed to remove SDCERS' constitutional authority to settle litigation without approval of the Council.On September 13, 2011, the City Council voted unanimously in favor of the ordinance. Proposal of the ordinance came after SDCERS' Board of Administration settled the Italiano/MEA case, after significant deliberation and consideration of the risk in incurring greater litigation costs. More...

Update on Affected PSC Contracts of Active Members "Trapped in DROP"

Date: Apr 12, 2011 Categories: DROP, Litigation, Purchase of Service (PSC)

The City Attorney’s office initially assured SDCERS it would not object to SDCERS’ request of the court for a clarification order exempting from correction affected PSC contracts of those Members in DROP before November 20, 2007. On Monday, April 11, however, the City Attorney’s office instead filed with the court an opposition to SDCERS’ request (see PDF of Opposition, at the bottom of this page). More...

Hearing Date Set For Decision Regarding Active DROP Members with Affected PSC Contracts

Date: Mar 22, 2011 Categories: Litigation, Purchase of Service (PSC)

A hearing has been set for April 22, 2011, regarding the matter of certain Active DROP Members with affected Purchase of Service Credit (PSC) contracts, related to the PSC Correction process. More...

Judge Grants Change of Venue Request for "Substantially Equal" case filed by City of San Diego

Date: Feb 10, 2011 Categories: Litigation

Superior Court Judge Joan M. Lewis has granted SDCERS' Motion for a Change of Venue to Los Angeles County, in the City of San Diego's lawsuit against SDCERS commonly referred to as the "substantially equal" case. The lawsuit seeks to include annual investment gains and losses in the calculation of employee and City contribution rates. However, since SDCERS' inception nearly 90 years ago, investment gains and losses have never been included in the calculation of employee contribution rates. More...

Retirement Board Takes Action on "Substantially Equal"

Date: Jun 02, 2010 Categories: Board, Litigation

SDCERS' Board of Administration recently took two important actions regarding the "substantially equal" language contained in City Charter section 143, following three public sessions in which the topic was discussed and analyzed extensively. More...

SDCERS Responds to City's Lawsuit on "Substantially Equal" Contributions

Date: May 05, 2010 Categories: Litigation

On May 3, 2010, SDCERS received a Petition of Writ of Mandate from the City of San Diego requesting that the Superior Court of California command SDCERS to incorporate an equal share of investment losses into the calculation of City employee contributions. More...

Final Ruling on PSC Litigation

Date: Nov 13, 2008 Categories: Litigation, Purchase of Service (PSC)

The Court issued its final ruling on November 13, 2008. In it, the Court ordered the SDCERS Board to set aside the Board's November, 2007 decision to continue to amortize the PSC funding shortfall through the City's existing unfunded actuarial liability. More...

Court of Appeal Dismisses City Attorney's Appeal in Pension Benefits Case

Date: Nov 13, 2008 Categories: Litigation

The California Court of Appeal, 4th Appellate District, Division 1, has dismissed the City Attorney's appeal in SDCERS vs. City of San Diego, Case No. GIC 841845. Click below to read the press release. More...