Mary Wade and Marla Paddock, Plaintiffs/appellants v. Arizona State Retirement System; Arizona State Retirement…

Summary

The court held that contractually required employer contributions to a deferred-compensation plan constitute compensation under the Arizona State Retirement System statute when made as part of an employee's salary. It concluded that the statute is ambiguous but that statutory context, avoidance of surplusage, and related provisions support including those contributions. The court also upheld the attorney-fee award, vacated specified paragraphs of the intermediate appellate opinion, affirmed otherwise, and remanded for calculation of fees.