« Ind. Law - "Who must use seat belts?" | Main | Ind. Decisions - 7th Circuit issues one Indiana decision today »

Monday, December 29, 2008

Courts - "California judges will lose the perks unless lawmakers decide to help"

From an interesting story by Mike McKee of The Recorder:

Any hope the California Supreme Court might resolve a politically sensitive imbroglio over extra judicial benefits dissipated Tuesday when the high court refused to review the case that stirred things up.

The Supreme Court's unanimous vote -- minus participation by Justice Kathryn Mickle Werdegar, who was absent -- means the judges will lose the perks unless lawmakers decide to help.

The Supreme Court's decision to not take up Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles , S168408, lets stand a lower court ruling that could void L.A. County's 20-year practice of supplementing judges' $178,000 salaries and state-provided benefits with perks that amounted to almost $50,000 a year.

The Oct. 10 ruling by San Diego's 4th District Court of Appeal held that the practice violated the state Constitution's requirement that the Legislature "prescribe compensation for judges." County-funded judicial perks occur in many of the state's 58 counties, but Los Angeles' appear to be the most lucrative.

One wonders if the result in Indiana would be just the opposite. Our Constitution states:
Art. 7, Section 19. Pay. The Justices of Supreme Court and Judges of the Court of Appeals and of the Circuit Courts shall at stated times receive a compensation which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office. (History: As Amended November 3, 1970).
See, for instance, this ILB entry from Dec. 4, 2007, headed "Retired Grant Circuit Judge Thomas Hunt wins pay suit,"and its related links.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on December 29, 2008 10:35 AM
Posted to Courts in general