IMPORTANT LEGAL UPDATES FOR RSG MEMBERS APRIL 17, 2013

Transcription

1 1 IMPORTANT LEGAL UPDATES FOR RSG MEMBERS APRIL 17, 2013 To those RSG members who are planning to attend The public hearing on the County s motion to dismiss our lawsuit originally scheduled for Friday, May 2nd, 2013: Please note that the date of the hearing has been changed to Monday, May 6th, 2013, at 2:00 p.m. All other information previously provided about the hearing remains the same: United States District Court Judge Jon S. Tigar, United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Phillip Burton Federal Building & United States Courthouse, Courtroom 9, 19th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco. Before you travel to San Francisco to attend the hearing, you should double-check the day before to make sure that the date or time of the hearing has not been changed again. The case name and docket number of our lawsuit is:

2 2 Retiree Support Group of Contra Costa County v. Contra Costa County, 3:12-cv JST. The web address for you to check on the status of this hearing is: Reminder: Do not bring any items with you such as a pocket knife or other weapon, a camera, or a tape recorder - that may not be brought into a federal government building. You will have to pass through a metal detector to enter the courthouse building. Cell phones are allowed, but you must turn the phone off when you enter the courtroom. On February 24, 2012, RSG filed a civil action against Contra Costa County in the United States District Court in San Francisco seeking a court order to force the County to retract the changes the County unilaterally made to the premium sharing formulas for our County-provided retiree health insurance. We then filed a First Amended Complaint to clarify some of our allegations. On July 10, 2012, the federal district court judge dismissed our First Amended Complaint on the basis that the facts we alleged were not sufficient in the eyes of the judge to state a claim for relief. The judge, however, recognized that by stating additional facts and circumstances, we might be able to state a claim for relief that he would find sufficient. The Court ruled that we should be given a chance to file a second amended complaint, and the Court ordered the County to give our

3 attorneys more than 30 years of records and documents to help in the preparation of a Second Amended Complaint. 3 On September 28, 2012, the County complied with the Court s discovery order by providing our attorneys with more than 30,000 pages of documents. Our attorneys and their staff spent two months reviewing these materials, and on November 30, 2012, RSG filed a Second Amended Complaint against the County. You can read our Second Amended Complaint by clicking on a link on our Home Page. On January 9, 2013, the County filed a motion to dismiss our Second Amended Complaint. The County thereafter filed a legal brief in support of the County s motion, and RSG filed a legal brief opposing the County s motion. On February 12, 2013, in order to equalize the caseloads of the judges in the District Court, our case was reassigned from United States District Court Judge Jeffrey S. White to newly-installed United States District Court Judge Jon S. Tigar for all further proceedings. To provide Judge Tigar with sufficient time to prepare to hear the County s motion to dismiss our Second Amended Complaint, the hearing on the County s motion was rescheduled. The motion is now set to be heard by Judge Tigar in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Phillip Burton Federal Building & United States Courthouse, Courtroom 9, 19th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, at 2:00 p.m., Thursday, May 6, The public hearing on the County s motion to dismiss our lawsuit is one of ten cases calendared to be heard that afternoon by Judge Tigar. The hearing is a public one which any person may attend. Anyone who plans to attend the hearing should check the day before to make sure that the date or time of the hearing has not been changed. The case name and docket number of our lawsuit is: Retiree Support Group of Contra Costa County v. Contra Costa County, 3:12-cv JST. The web address to check on the status of this hearing is:

4 4 The best way to attend this hearing is to take BART to the Civic Center BART station and then walk from the BART station to the courthouse. To ensure that you reach the courtroom on time, you should take the BART train that is scheduled to arrive at the Civic Center BART station at 1:14 p.m. That will give you time to walk to the courthouse, to go through the courthouse security screening, and to take the elevator to the 19th floor. The round-trip BART fare from the North Concord/Martinez BART station is about $3.50 for seniors holding a senior Clipper Card. Do not bring any items with you such as a pocket knife or other weapon, a camera, or a tape recorder - that may not be brought into a federal government building. You will have to pass through a metal detector to enter the courthouse building. Cell phones are allowed, but you must turn the phone off when you enter the courtroom. The County s motion to dismiss our suit will be orally argued that afternoon, but the judge is not likely to issue his ruling until a later date. Watch this site for news about the judge s ruling on the County s motion to dismiss our case. Sonoma County Association of Retired Employees v. Sonoma County The civil suit by Sonoma County retired employees (SCARE) against Sonoma County has received a shot in the arm. On February 25, 2013, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held in a split (2-1) decision that the District Court judge erred in dismissing the retirees suit without allowing the retirees to amend their complaint. The Sonoma County retirees have sued Sonoma County for that County s unilateral reduction of their retirement health benefits. District Court judge Claudia Wilkin had twice dismissed the retirees lawsuit on the grounds that their complaint failed to state a cause of action on which relief could be given. In overturning Judge Wilkin s decision, the Court of Appeals held that any deficiencies in the retirees complaint could be cured by amendment. The Court of Appeals sent the case back to Judge Wilkin to allow the retirees an opportunity to file another amended complaint.

5 The opinion of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals contains a number of holdings and language that can be cited by RSG s attorneys in opposition to Contra Costa County s motion to dismiss our complaint. Since the Sonoma County case is so similar to RSG s case against Contra Costa County, the opinion of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is especially welcome news. 5 Contra Costa County Deputy Sheriffs Association, et al v. Contra Costa County Employees Retirement Association, et al. The lawsuit filed in the Contra Costa County Superior Court by the DSA and United Professional Firefighters against CCCERA challenges the decision by the CCCERA Board of Trustees to apply changes in determining compensation that can be counted in calculating pensions for County and special district employees hired prior to January 1, The CCCERA Board voted 7-2 in October of 2012 to apply to existing employee the new Public Employee Pension Reform Act (PEPRA) standards for determining compensation earnable in pension calculations. This suit is in its initial stages, with new parties joining the action. Most of the active employee unions have joined the case as additional plaintiffs. Several of the employer members of CCCERA, including Contra Costa County, have joined the case on the side of the defendants. The State of California has intervened to defend the constitutionality of PEPRA. Contra Costa County Superior Court Judge David Flinn, who is assigned to this case, has held four status conferences in an effort to devise a schedule of proceedings to resolve preliminary motions and objections. The parties to this suit are likely to litigate the question whether this suit should be consolidated with similar suits in Marin, Alameda, and Merced Counties. At an appropriate time, the Court will entertain requests of non-parties who wish to file amicus curiae (Friend of the Court) briefs supporting either side of the case. RSG plans to file an amicus brief in support of the DSA and Firefighters plaintiffs.

6 The next date for a status conference in this case is May 9, 2013, at 9:30 a.m. in Department No. 6 of the Contra Costa Superior Court in Martinez. We will keep you advised on the progress of this case. 6