Anderson v. Bd. of Regents of Mo W. State College, WD59415
Court | Court of Appeal of Missouri (US) |
Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM |
Citation | 58 S.W.3d 581 |
Parties | William Andresen, et al., Appellants v. Board of Regents of Missouri Western State College, et al., Respondents. WD59415 Missouri Court of Appeals Western District 0 |
Docket Number | WD59415 |
Decision Date | 07 August 2001 |
William Andresen, et al., Appellants
v.
Board of Regents of Missouri Western State College, et al., Respondents.
WD59415
Missouri Court of Appeals Western District
08/07/2001
Appeal From: Circuit Court of Cole County, Hon. Thomas J. Brown, III
Counsel for Appellant: Daniel N. McPherson
Counsel for Respondent: Stephen J. Briggs
Opinion Summary:
Appellants, active and retired faculty members of Missouri Western State College (MWSC), petitioned for a declaratory judgment finding that they were entitled to receive benefits for accumulated sick leave prior to the 1992-1993 academic year. The court found in favor of respondents, Missouri State Employee's Retirement System ("MOSERS") and the MWSC Board of Regents. The court found that section 516.120, the applicable statute of limitations, barred their claims, that the Board was entitled to fix the compensation of its employees under sections 174.120 and 174.140, and that section 36.350 does not apply to academic institutions. Appellants argue that claims for additional compensation accrue when the compensation is due and not paid, and that their claims were brought within five years of when the compensation was due to them. Secondly, appellants argue that section 36.350 applies to academic institutions during the relevant time periods and that statute entitled MWSC's employees to accumulated sick leave without limitations.
Vacated as to the portion of the court's judgment barring Appellants' claims based on the expiration of the statute of limitations.
Affirmed in all other respects.
Division Two holds: Because the statute of limitations does not begin to run until the employee is eligible to obtain that benefit, Appellants' cause of action was timely filed.
The legislature unambiguously intended to exclude academic institutions from section 36.350, and, thus, section 36.350 does not conflict with sections 174.120 and 174.140. Further, the amendment to section 36.020(1) was intended only to clarify an existing law and was not meant to include academic institutions within section 36.350 prior to the amendment.
Jr., J., concurs and
Spinden, C.J., concurs in separate concurring opinion.
Thomas H. Newton, Judge
I. Factual and Procedural Background
Appellants are active and retired faculty members of Missouri Western State College (MWSC). The Honorable Thomas J. Brown, III, of the Circuit Court of Cole County entered an order certifying Appellants' action as a class action. The class is defined as all persons who were employed by MWSC and who were members of Missouri State Employee's Retirement System (MOSERS) during the 1992-93 academic school year and who earned, prior to July 1, 1992, unused accumulated sick leave that has not been counted by MWSC for purposes of reporting to MOSERS. The Respondents are MOSERS and MWSC. MOSERS is a statutory retirement system that provides retirement income and other benefits for state employees.
This appeal arose after the trial court ruled against the Appellants, finding that they were not entitled to a declaratory judgment and are, therefore, not entitled to receive benefits for accumulated sick leave prior to the 1992-1993 academic year. Before 1988, faculty members were members of the Public School Retirement System of Missouri (PSRS). In 1988-89, many of the faculty, administration, staff, and employees of MWSC elected to became members of MOSERS, but some teachers elected to stay in the PSRS. But those retiring under the MOSERS plan have the benefit of utilizing the amount of creditable service accrued based on unused accumulated sick leave. The accumulated sick leave is determined by a formula pursuant to section 104.601 or section 104.1021.2, which entitles the members of MOSERS to receive, upon the member's retirement, additional creditable service for the member's unused accumulated sick leave as reported to MOSERS by the member's employer.
Section 104.601 was enacted in 1982 and provided that for each eighty-four days of unused accumulated sick leave earned the employee gained one-twelfth of a year of creditable service. It was amended in 1984 to provide for one-twelfth of a year of creditable service for each forty-two days of unused accumulated sick leave, and in 1990 it was amended again allowing for one-twelfth of a year of creditable service for each twenty-one days of unused accumulated sick leave earned by an employee.
Then in 1999, the legislature passed sections 104.800 through 104.1093. In particular section 104.1006 created a new retirement system referred to as the Year 2000 Plan. This new plan replaced the previous plan herein referred to as the Closed Plan.(FN1) The Closed Plan under section 104.1003(7) is "a benefit plan created pursuant to [Chapter 104] and administered by a system prior to July 1, 2000." It precluded persons employed on or after July 1, 2000, from joining the Closed Plan, but those who were members prior to July 1, 2000, could continue to be covered by and remain in the Closed Plan.(FN2) Those employed on or after July 1, 2000, are members of the Year 2000 Plan.(FN3) The Appellants in this class are all members of the Closed Plan. Members retiring under the Closed Plan have their creditable service calculated under section 104.601, while section 104.1021.2 governs the way the creditable service is calculated under the Year 2000 Plan. These statutes governing MOSERS generally entitle a member of MOSERS to receive, upon the member's retirement, additional creditable service for the member's unused accumulated sick leave as reported to MOSERS by the member's employer. Section 104.601 governs the amount of additional service to which retirees under the Closed Plan are entitled for their unused accumulated sick leave. It allows members who retire under the Closed...
To continue reading
Request your trial7 practice notes
-
City of Jefferson City, Mo. v. Cingular Wireless, No. 07-2884.
...of a statutory amendment can be to clarify the law rather than change the existing law. Andresen v. Bd. of Regents of Mo. W. State Coll., 58 S.W.3d 581, 589 (Mo.Ct. App.2001) (concluding that the amendment clarified the legislature's original intent to exclude academic institutions from the......
-
State v. Galkowski, No. ED 99832.
...the weight of the evidence, or it erroneously declares or applies the law.” Andresen v. Bd. of Regents of Mo. Western State College, 58 S.W.3d 581, 585 (Mo.App.W.D.2001). Where, as here, the relevant facts are not disputed, the only issue for appellate review is whether the trial court drew......
-
Beavers v. Recreation Ass'n Lake Shore Est., No. 25556.
...of the Association, we review this case under the same standard as if the declaratory judgment was ordered. Andresen v. Board of Regents, 58 S.W.3d 581, 585 (Mo.App.2001). "This court reviews a declaratory judgment under the standard applicable to other court-tried cases." Id. The standard ......
-
Carroll v. Missouri Bd. of Probation, No. WD 61871.
...(Mo.App.2002) (standard of review from grant of summary judgment is de novo) and Andresen v. Bd. of Regents of Mo. Western State Coll., 58 S.W.3d 581, 585 (Mo.App.2001) (standard of review of denial of declaratory judgment is that of any other court-tried case, i.e., Murphy v. Carron, 536 S......
Request a trial to view additional results
7 cases
-
City of Jefferson City, Mo. v. Cingular Wireless, No. 07-2884.
...of a statutory amendment can be to clarify the law rather than change the existing law. Andresen v. Bd. of Regents of Mo. W. State Coll., 58 S.W.3d 581, 589 (Mo.Ct. App.2001) (concluding that the amendment clarified the legislature's original intent to exclude academic institutions from the......
-
State v. Galkowski, No. ED 99832.
...the weight of the evidence, or it erroneously declares or applies the law.” Andresen v. Bd. of Regents of Mo. Western State College, 58 S.W.3d 581, 585 (Mo.App.W.D.2001). Where, as here, the relevant facts are not disputed, the only issue for appellate review is whether the trial court drew......
-
Beavers v. Recreation Ass'n Lake Shore Est., No. 25556.
...of the Association, we review this case under the same standard as if the declaratory judgment was ordered. Andresen v. Board of Regents, 58 S.W.3d 581, 585 (Mo.App.2001). "This court reviews a declaratory judgment under the standard applicable to other court-tried cases." Id. The standard ......
-
Carroll v. Missouri Bd. of Probation, No. WD 61871.
...(Mo.App.2002) (standard of review from grant of summary judgment is de novo) and Andresen v. Bd. of Regents of Mo. Western State Coll., 58 S.W.3d 581, 585 (Mo.App.2001) (standard of review of denial of declaratory judgment is that of any other court-tried case, i.e., Murphy v. Carron, 536 S......
Request a trial to view additional results