Judge: Pension Ruling from the Circuit Court to come Friday,
November 21st (State Journal-Register).
November 21st (State Journal-Register).
Illinois Retired Teachers
Association
Illinois Association of School
Administrators
Filed: December 27, 2013
Location: Cook County
Plaintiffs:
2 TRS annuitant teachers
1 TRS annuitant administrator
1 TRS annuitant administrator
5 TRS active administrators
—Seek to represent class of TRS actives and annuitants who
are not currently IEA or IFT members
Defendants:
Governor
Comptroller
Comptroller
TRS
Primary Claims:
COLA, minimum retirement age, and pensionable salary
cap: changes violate Pension Clause of Illinois Constitution
Remedies:
Declaration law is unconstitutional
Injunction stopping its implementation
Monetary damages
Preliminary injunction temporarily stopping implementation (protecting status quo)
Injunction stopping its implementation
Monetary damages
Preliminary injunction temporarily stopping implementation (protecting status quo)
Illinois State Employees Association
Retirees (ISEAR)
Filed: January 2, 2014
Location: Sangamon County
Plaintiffs:
ISEAR
2 SERS annuitant members
1 GARS annuitant member
1 TRS annuitant member
1 SURS annuitant member
—Seek to represent class of all SERS, GARS, TRS and SURS annuitants and subclass of State 2002 ERI annuitants with 20 years of service and “not subject to a CBA”
1 GARS annuitant member
1 TRS annuitant member
1 SURS annuitant member
—Seek to represent class of all SERS, GARS, TRS and SURS annuitants and subclass of State 2002 ERI annuitants with 20 years of service and “not subject to a CBA”
Defendants:
Comptroller
Treasurer
SERS, GARS, TRS and SURS
Primary Claims:
COLA changes violate Pension, Contract and Equal Protection (by not including judges’ retirement system (JRS)) Clauses of Illinois Constitution
Treasurer
SERS, GARS, TRS and SURS
Primary Claims:
COLA changes violate Pension, Contract and Equal Protection (by not including judges’ retirement system (JRS)) Clauses of Illinois Constitution
Remedies:
Declaration law is unconstitutional
Injunction stopping its implementation
Injunction reinstating prior law
Escrow of difference between COLA calculations, pending resolution of lawsuit
Injunction stopping its implementation
Injunction reinstating prior law
Escrow of difference between COLA calculations, pending resolution of lawsuit
Retired State Employees
Association (RSEA)
Filed: January 2, 2014
Location: Sangamon County
Plaintiffs:
RSEA (on behalf of all its members)
4 SERS annuitant members
—Seek to represent class of all SERS annuitants, survivors and inactive employees not yet receiving benefits and subclass of State ERI annuitants
4 SERS annuitant members
—Seek to represent class of all SERS annuitants, survivors and inactive employees not yet receiving benefits and subclass of State ERI annuitants
Defendants:
Governor
Comptroller o Treasurer
SERS
Comptroller o Treasurer
SERS
Primary Claims:
COLA changes violate Pension and Contract Clauses of
Illinois Constitution
Remedies:
Declaration law is unconstitutional
Injunction stopping its implementation
Escrow of difference between COLA calculations, pending resolution of lawsuit
Injunction stopping its implementation
Escrow of difference between COLA calculations, pending resolution of lawsuit
We Are One Illinois Coalition (WAOI)
Filed: January 28, 2014
Location: Sangamon County
Plaintiffs:
WAOI
5 TRS active teachers
3 TRS annuitant teachers
3 SURS active members
3 SURS annuitant members
9 SERS active members
2 SERS annuitant members
—Seek to represent class of actives and annuitants from TRS
3 TRS annuitant teachers
3 SURS active members
3 SURS annuitant members
9 SERS active members
2 SERS annuitant members
—Seek to represent class of actives and annuitants from TRS
SURS and SERS Defendants:
Governor
Comptroller
Treasurer
TRS, SURS and SERS
Comptroller
Treasurer
TRS, SURS and SERS
Primary Claims:
COLA, minimum retirement age, and pensionable salary cap changes violate Pension, Contract and Takings Clauses of Illinois Constitution; failure to fund pension benefits provided under prior law violates Takings Clause of Illinois Constitution
Remedies:
Declaration law is unconstitutional
Declaration State must fund pension systems
Injunction stopping its implementation
Preliminary injunction protecting status quo (temporarily stopping implementation)
State
Universities Annuitants Association (SUAA)
Filed: March 6, 2014
Location: Champaign County
Plaintiffs:
SUAA (on behalf of all its members)
6 SURS active members
3 SURS annuitant members
1 SURS deceased annuitant member spouse
6 SURS active members
3 SURS annuitant members
1 SURS deceased annuitant member spouse
Defendants:
Governor
Comptroller
Treasurer
SURS
Primary Claims:
COLA, minimum retirement age, pensionable salary cap
and interest rate for portable plan changes violate Pension, Contract and
Takings Clauses of Illinois Constitution
Remedies:
Declaration law is unconstitutional
Injunction stopping its implementation o Injunction restoring prior benefits
Injunction stopping its implementation o Injunction restoring prior benefits
On
March 3, 2014, the Illinois Supreme Court consolidated the first four lawsuits
for proceedings in Sangamon County Circuit Court. On April 8, 2014, the fifth
lawsuit, filed by the State Universities Annuitants Association on March 6,
2014, was consolidated with the other four.
For a
Commentary (and just one of many from pension analyses): Click Here.
Thanks for all the hard work you're doing on our behalf as retired teachers. The information is invaluable.
ReplyDeleteFrom Mitch Roth:
ReplyDeleteDate: November 20, 2014
Re: Pension Lawsuit Decision to Issue Tomorrow at 2pm
Today, [November 20] a hearing was held in Sangamon County Circuit Court in the Pension lawsuit on our motion that the State constitution’s pension clause does not permit the State to impair or diminish pension benefits under any circumstances. The judge will issue his written decision tomorrow at 2. If the judge rules in our favor, he will be deciding that SB 1 is unconstitutional. Even if he rules against our motion, it won’t mean that he is ruling that SB 1 is constitutional. It will only mean that he wants to hear evidence on the State’s claim that in severe financial circumstances, it can diminish pension rights. Once he hears that evidence, he could very well still decide that the law is unconstitutional because the State hasn’t made the case that the situation is so dire that it can abrogate pension benefits. We will keep you posted.