# County of Alameda v. Board of Retirement

> California Supreme Court · September 19, 1988 · 46 Cal. 3d 902

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9548748

## Case

- **Full name:** COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. BOARD OF RETIREMENT OF THE ALAMEDA COUNTY EMPLOYEES’ RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION, Defendant and Respondent; ROGER L. CARNES, Real Party in Interest and Appellant
- **Court:** California Supreme Court
- **Decided:** September 19, 1988
- **Citations:** 46 Cal. 3d 902; 251 Cal. Rptr. 267; 760 P.2d 464; 1988 Cal. LEXIS 196
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Mosk
- **Judges:** Eagleson, Broussard, Mosk
- **Cited by:** 21 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9548748

## Opinion text

MOSK, J.
I agree with Justice Broussard’s dissent. I write separately only to express my disenchantment with extensive litigation between two agencies of the same governmental entity.
Here we have the County of Alameda, acting through its board of supervisors and county counsel, suing the County of Alameda Board of Retirement. Not only is such an internecine lawsuit unseemly, it has occupied the time and resources of a trial court, an intermediate appellate court, and now this court, not to mention the legal talent involved.
*918 Certainly there must have been a simpler alternative method of settling a dispute between two county departments. At the outset counsel should have taken steps to have the problem resolved without the necessity of lengthy litigation that has now burdened the judicial system for more than five years.
In short, the courts have important issues to decide. They should not be required to resolve a local turf controversy.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9548748. Public record. Not legal advice.