Terminating the Employment Relationship

192 Gov. Code, § 21192. 193 Gov. Code, § 31720. 194 Gov. Code, § 31729; Schrier v. San Mateo County Employees' Retirement Assn. (1983) 142 Cal.App.3d 957 [191 Cal.Rptr. 421]. 195 Reynolds v. City of San Carlos (1981) 126 Cal.App.3d 208, 216 [178 Cal.Rptr. 636, 640–641]. 196 Montgomery v. Board of Retirement (1973) 33 Cal.App.3d 447, 451–452 [109 Cal.Rptr. 181, 184–186]. 197 Gov. Code, § 20046. 198 Gov. Code, § 31720, subd. (a), citing Bowen v. Board of Retirement (1986) 42 Cal.3d 572, 578 [229 Cal.Rptr. 814, 818, 724 P.2d 500], rehg. den. 199 Gov. Code, § 31720, subd. (a). 200 De Puy v. Board of Retirement (1978) 87 Cal.App.3d 392, 399 [150 Cal.Rptr. 791, 796]; Lundak v. Board of Retirement (1983) 142 Cal.App.3d 1040, 1045 [191 Cal.Rptr. 446, 448–449]. 204 Smith v. City of Napa (2004) 120 Cal.App.4th 194, 205 [14 Cal.Rptr.3d 908], rehg. & review den. See also Haywood v. American River Fire Protection Dist. (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 1292 [79 Cal.Rptr.2d 749], review den. 205 Smith v. City of Napa (2004) 120 Cal.App.4th 194, 205 [14 Cal.Rptr.3d 908] [bus driver terminated for failure to maintain drivers license where loss of license was due to disabling medical condition was held to be separation of the employee for disability]. 206 Smith v. City of Napa (2004) 120 Cal.App.4th 194, 206 [14 Cal.Rptr.3d 908, 915–916], rehg. & review den. 207 Smith v. City of Napa (2004) 120 Cal.App.4th 194, 206 [14 Cal.Rptr.3d 908, 915–916], rehg. & review den. 210 Gov. Code, §§ 21151, 31721; Lazan v. County of Riverside (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 453, 460 [44 Cal.Rptr.3d 394, 398–399], review den., [applying PERS law]; Rodarte v. Orange County Fire Authority (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 19, 23 [123 Cal.Rptr.2d 475, 477–478], review den., [applying CERL law]. 211 Lazan v. County of Riverside (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 453, 462 [44 Cal.Rptr.3d 394, 400], review den. 212 Gov. Code, § 21153, 31721. 213 Rodarte v. Orange County Fire Authority (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 19 [123 Cal.Rptr.2d 475], review den., [in applying ’37 Act law, the court held that the statutory requirement that “an employer may not separate because of disability a member otherwise eligible to retire for disability…” did not equate to a requirement that the employer continue to pay the employee, after exhaustion of paid leaves, pending resolution of the retirement application.]. 214 Riverside Sheriffs' Assn. v. County of Riverside (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 20 [122 Cal.Rptr.3d 197]. 215 Gov. Code, §§ 21154, 31722. 216 Gov. Code, § 21154. 217 Gutierrez v. Board of Retirement of Los Angeles County Employees Retirement Ass'n (1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 745 [72 Cal.Rptr.2d 837], rehg. & review den. 218 Lazan v. County of Riverside (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 453 [44 Cal.Rptr.3d 394], review den. 219 Lab. Code, § 4853. 208 Gov. Code, § 21152. 209 Gov. Code, § 31721. 201 Gov. Code, §§ 21156, subd. (a)(2), 31720.3. 202 CalPERS Circular Letter No: 200-018-017. 203 Duff v. City of Gardena (1980) 108 Cal.App.3d 930, 937 [167 Cal.Rptr. 4, 7].

Terminating the Employment Relationship ©2019 (s) Liebert Cassidy Whitmore 138