Arnow v. Williams
| Decision Date | 24 March 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. BB--347,BB--347 |
| Citation | 343 So.2d 1309 |
| Parties | Robert Edward ARNOW, Appellant, v. James H. WILLIAMS, Secretary of the Department of Administration of the State of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bryan W. Henry and James R. English, of Henry & Buchanan, Tallahassee, for appellant.
Stephen S. Mathues, Asst. Division Atty.; David V. Kerns, General Counsel, Tallahassee, for appellee.
Appellant Robert Edward Arnow is a retired state employee and a member of the state and county officers and employees retirement system. This is an appeal from a final declaratory judgment which determined that the spouse (Nell Margaret Arnow) of appellant at the time of his retirement will not be entitled to retirement benefits if she survives him.
During his employment with the State, appellant contributed portions of his salary to the retirement system and upon retiring, he elected the option provided in § 122.08(4), Fla.Stat., 1969, which states in pertinent part as follows:
Appellant retired on April 14, 1971, and selected one of the options available to him at the time under the above statute. Under such option, he gave up the retirement benefits which he would normally be entitled to receive and elected to receive the actuarial equivalent thereof in a reduced amount to him for the balance of his life with one-half of such amount to go to his spouse, Nell, for the balance of her life if she survived him. Sometime subsequent thereto, the marriage between appellant and Nell was dissolved, and appellant married Myrtle Collins Arnow. He then requested a certification from the administrators of the retirement system to the effect that in the event of his prior death, Nell, if she survived him, would be paid the monthly benefits under the foregoing option which he had selected when he retired. Appellee, the Department of Administration, ruled, however, that no monthly benefits would be paid to Nell because she would not be his surviving spouse. On previous such occasions, the Department has also ruled that the retirement benefits would not be paid to the spouse to whom a retiree was married at the time of his death if such spouse was not his spouse at the time of his retirement and election of the option.
The Department contends, and we agree, that the retirement benefits vest at the time of retirement and at the time the retiree receives his first retirement check. City of Jacksonville Beach v. State, 151 So.2d 430 (Fla.1963). As to a retiree's spouse at the time of his death who was not his spouse at the time of his retirement, the Department's position is that such spouse would not be entitled to receive benefits because the retirement rights vested at the time of retirement. The reduced benefit became fixed at that time and the actuarial equivalent of what the retiree would otherwise have received during his life was determined and fixed from a combination of his life expectancy at his then age and his then spouse's life expectancy at her then age. Thus, if his spouse at the time of his death was not the spouse upon whose age the actuarial equivalent had been determined, that spouse would not be entitled to the benefits. With this we also agree.
The Department also takes the position that the retiree's benefit may not be recalculated after he retires and receives his first retirement check to give him what he would otherwise have received had he not elected the option. With this we also agree. § 122.08(4) above quoted provides:
'Such option...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Grady v. Division of Retirement
...and all benefits accrued to him by the law then in effect. 2 City of Jacksonville Beach, supra, at 432. Accord, Arnow v. Williams, 343 So.2d 1309 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977), applying the same rule even though it appears from the opinion the employee's participation in the plan was As stated, none ......
-
Eaves v. Divison of Retirement
...by the deceased (a former wife and their two children) rather than to the decedent's wife at the time of his death); Arnow v. Williams, 343 So.2d 1309 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); Rogers v. Rogers, 152 So.2d 183 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963) (holding that a former wife whom a teacher designated as his benefi......
-
Bishop v. State, Division of Retirement
...causes of action accrue. They retired in 1973 and 1974, at which time their retirement benefits vested. Arnow v. Williams, 343 So.2d 1309, 1310 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). The Division thus urges that any breach of contract occurred as of the appellants' respective retirement dates and, therefore,......