- 10 -
CGC section 75061(a) expresses an intention by the California
legislature to provide supplemental benefits in the nature of
workers’ compensation to all judges who sustain a work-related
disability.
The statute in this case is not akin to the statute at issue
in Kane v. United States, 43 F.3d 1446 (Fed. Cir. 1994), a case
upon which respondent relies. The statute at issue in that case,
28 U.S.C. sec. 372(a), provided:
“Any justice or judge of the United States
appointed to hold office during good behavior who
becomes permanently disabled from performing his duties
may retire from regular active service....
....
Each justice or judge retiring under this section
after serving ten years continuously or otherwise
shall, during the remainder of his lifetime, receive
the salary of the office. A justice or judge retiring
under this section who has served less than ten years
in all shall, during the remainder of his lifetime,
receive one-half the salary of the office.” [Id. at
1447-1448.]
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that this
provision was not a dual-purpose statute, stating:
However, unlike the statutes in Simms, Neill, and
Frye, � 372(a) provides for disability retirement
payments regardless of the cause of the disability. In
contrast, Simms, Neill, and Frye involved statutes in
which at least one provision, on its face, specifically
7(...continued)
category as an individual eligible for either mode of disability
retirement under CGC sec. 75061(a). However, the actual basis
upon which the taxpayer was retired (i.e., for what purpose) is a
factual question that is secondary to the legal question whether
the statute has a dual purpose.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011