HUTTO v. SOUTH CAROLINA RETIREMENT SYSTEM

Civil Action No. 4:10-cv-02018-JMC.

899 F.Supp.2d 457 (2012)

Gail M. HUTTO, Debra J. Andrews, Elizabeth W. Hodge, Margaret B. Lineberger, Lynn R. Rogers, Nancy G. Sullivan, Jane P. Terwilliger, Julian W. Walls, and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. The SOUTH CAROLINA RETIREMENT SYSTEM, the Police Officers Retirement System, the South Carolina Retirement Systems Group Trust, Mark Sanford, Governor of South Carolina, in his official capacity as ex officio Chairman of the South Carolina Budget and Control Board, Richard Eckstrom, Comptroller General of the State of South Carolina, in his official capacity as an ex officio member of the South Carolina Budget and Control Board, Hugh K. Leatherman, Chairman of the South Carolina House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee, in his official capacity as an ex officio member of the South Carolina Budget and Control Board, Daniel T. Cooper, Chairman of the South Carolina Ways and Means Committee, in his official capacity as Executive Director of the South Carolina Budget and Control Board, and Peggy G. Boykin, in her official capacity as Director of the Retirement Division of the South Carolina Budget and Control Board, Defendants.

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Florence Division.

Order Denying Reconsideration April 4, 2013.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Arthur Camden Lewis , James Mixon Griffin , Margaret Nicole Fox , Lewis Babcock and Griffin, Peter D. Protopapas , Rikard and Protopapas, Richard A. Harpootlian , Graham Lee Newman , Richard A. Harpootlian Law Office, Columbia, SC, for Plaintiffs.

Robert Erving Stepp , Tina Marie Cundari , Sowell Gray Stepp and Laffitte, Columbia, SC, for Defendants.


ORDER AND OPINION

J. MICHELLE CHILDS, District Judge.

Plaintiffs are retired members of a pension trust plan1 administered by the South Carolina Retirement Systems ("Retirement Systems") who were rehired on or after July 1, 2005, by employers participating in the Retirement Systems. Plaintiffs bring this action, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, challenging the constitutionality of South Carolina's State...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases