Valdes v. Cory

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “[A] court of this state is powerless to compel the Legislature to appropriate such sums or to order payment of the indebtedness”
• legislation suspending employer contributions to state retirement system violated beneficiaries’ vested contractual rights to retirement benefits
• The payment of statutorily defined benefits, upon maturity, is a general obligation of the state regardless of sums existing in the retirement fund. . . .
• “Absent actuarial input from the Board ... legislative action randomly and unilaterally cancelling or decreasing otherwise continuously appropriated, periodic employer contributions clearly interferes with vested contractual rights of PERS members.”
• “The explicit language in the retirement law constitutes a contractual obligation on the part of the state as employer to abide by its ‘continuing obligation’ ... to make the statutorily set payment of monthly contributions to PERS.... ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).