> >
| Case Name | Hobbs v. Marin county Employees Retirement Assn. | |
|---|---|---|
| Date | 09/30/2008 | |
| Note | [Unpublished] Courts have rejected the claim that the class of employees to which the heart trouble presumption applies should be expanded and accordingly, the court did not err by failing to 'impute' the legislative intent plaintiff claims is behind the heart trouble presumptions in workers' compensation law...to the service-related disability retirement of all county employees. | |
| Citation | A120222 | |
| WCC Citation | WCC 34332008 CA |
Filed 9/30/08 Hobbs v. Marin county Employees Retirement Assn. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR DONALD HOBBS, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. MARIN COUNTY EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION, Defendant and Respondent. That petition sought review of the administrative decision of respondent Marin County Employees' Retirement Association (County) denying his application for service-connected disability retirement benefits. (See Singh v. Board of Retirement (1996) 41 Cal. App. 4th 1180, 1185; Heaton v. Marin County Employees Retirement Bd. While the County Employees Retirement Act of 1937 and the Workers' Compensation Act "are related in subject matter and harmonious in purpose" (Kuntz v. Kern County Employees' Retirement Assn.
Download full case here.
Download full case here.