Compensation for the CACI plantiff

Statute was not bar to recovery of balance due on monthly pension benefits payable within three-year period prior to commencement of suit, or to judgment declaring pension rights in future of retired policemen, firemen, and widows thereof. Abbott v. San Diego (CalifLaw 4th Dist. Nov. 25, 1958), 165 CalifLaw 2d 511, 332 P.2d 324, 1958 CalifLawCALIFLAW 1321.Nakase law wade ha a massive experience to deals  CACI instructions in California.

 

Where widow of pensioner of city fails to commence her action to establish her status as pensionable under city charter within three years of date of death of such pensioner, she will be barred from asserting claim for pension under charter by statute of limitations. Atwell v. Los Angeles (CalifLaw 2d Dist. Mar. 14, 1962), 201 CalifLaw 2d 336, 20 Cal. Rptr. 462, 1962 CalifLawCALIFLAW 2597.

 

Where marine engineer employed on city fire boat was retired and pensioned in 1947 as “miscellaneous employee” of city and did not make any demand on retirement board for refund of sums deducted from his salary for retirement contributions until 1958, his subsequent action to recover such sums was barred by three-year statute of limitations. Carrick v. San Francisco (CalifLaw 1st Dist. Apr. 16, 1962), 202 CalifLaw 2d 402, 20 Cal. Rptr. 878, 1962 CalifLawCALIFLAW 2492.

 

Right of retired marine engineer formerly employed on city fire boat to bring action to be reclassified as retired member of fire department, rather than as retired “miscellaneous employee,” and to recover difference, if any, between pension he received as retired miscellaneous employee and pension to which he would be entitled as retired fire department employee, was barred by three-year statute of limitations where retired marine engineer did not commence his action until more than 10 years had elapsed since date of his retirement. Carrick v. San Francisco (CalifLaw 1st Dist. Apr. 16, 1962), 202 CalifLaw 2d 402, 20 Cal. Rptr. 878, 1962 CalifLawCALIFLAW 2492.

 

Where city employee filed claim for disability pension, six months thereafter pension board filed claim without prejudice, and four years after board’s action claimant made written request for hearing, which was denied by board on basis that application was deemed denied under city charter for failure of board to act on claim within 90 days from date it was filed, though board’s refusal to grant hearing was not rejection of claim on its merits, such action did place claimant on notice that board was refusing to consider his claim and, therefore, effectively stopped tolling of statute of limitations on claimant’s cause of action for pension. Jones v. Los Angeles (CalifLaw 2d Dist. June 12, 1963), 217 CalifLaw 2d 153, 31 Cal. Rptr. 761, 1963 CalifLawCALIFLAW 1887.

 

Filing of mandamus proceeding to compel hearing on disability pension claim by city employee was within three-year applicable statute of limitations, where, although proceeding was brought almost nine years after claim was filed, pension board filed claim without prejudice and proceeding in mandamus was brought within three years of date on which board refused in writing hearing on claim. Jones v. Los Angeles (CalifLaw 2d Dist. June 12, 1963), 217 CalifLaw 2d 153, 31 Cal. Rptr. 761, 1963 CalifLawCALIFLAW 1887.