Aubrey v. Kentucky Retirement Systems, 083019 KYCA, 2018-CA-000622-MR
|Opinion Judge:||KRAMER, JUDGE:|
|Party Name:||JOHN AUBREY, INDIVIDUALLY AND IN HIS CAPACITY AS SHERIFF OF JEFFERSON COUNTY; MARK MATTHEWS, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SHERIFF OF BOURBON COUNTY; LEEROY HARDIN, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SHERIFF OF BOYLE COUNTY; TODD PATE, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SHERIFF OF BRECKENRIDGE COUNTY; STAN HUDSON, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SHERIFF OF CALDWEL...|
|Attorney:||BRIEF FOR APPELLANTS: David Leightty Louisville, Kentucky BRIEF FOR APPELLEE: Robert Kellerman Frankfort, Kentucky|
|Judge Panel:||BEFORE: DIXON, KRAMER, AND K. THOMPSON, JUDGES.|
|Case Date:||August 30, 2019|
|Court:||Court of Appeals of Kentucky|
APPEAL FROM FRANKLIN CIRCUIT COURT HONORABLE THOMAS D. WINGATE, JUDGE ACTION NO. 09-CI-00087
BRIEF FOR APPELLANTS: David Leightty Louisville, Kentucky
BRIEF FOR APPELLEE: Robert Kellerman Frankfort, Kentucky
BEFORE: DIXON, KRAMER, AND K. THOMPSON, JUDGES.
The subject of this appeal is an underlying declaratory judgment that addressed the validity of Kentucky Revised Statute (KRS) 61.637(17), as amended in 2008; for various reasons discussed below, the above-captioned appellants (collectively, the "Aubrey Plaintiffs") contested the statute's constitutionality. The Franklin Circuit Court rejected their challenge, upheld the validity of the statute, and accordingly granted summary judgment to the appellee. This appeal followed. Upon review, we affirm.
In its dispositive order of March 29, 2018, the circuit court set forth most of the relevant factual and procedural history of this matter: On June 27, 2008, the Kentucky General Assembly enacted House Bill 1 (HB 1). In the drafting of that bill, the legislature enhanced KRS 61.637(17). The Court incorporates by reference HB 1's amendment of KRS 61.637(17), as of June 27, 2008, to this Opinion and Order. The change caused multiple effects on the statutory scheme. First, HB 1 imposed a one month waiting period for hazardous duty employees between retiring from a participating employer and new full or part time employment with another participating employer. The amendment similarly imposed a penalty for violating the waiting period, in which resuming employment before the expiration of the period the member's retirement will void the employer's benefit eligibility and the member will be liable for repaying the benefits received. The statute change requires employees to certify that he or she did not have a prearranged agreement for future reemployment prior to the employee's initial retirement. Finally, HB 1 imposed a penalty on the employee if no certification occurred that a prearranged agreement did not exist.
Eugenia "Toni" Glover served as a police officer at the Louisville Metro Police Department (LMPD). During the summer of 2008, around the time of the enactment of HB 1, Glover was approaching 20 years of service in CERS [County Employee's Retirement System]. Throughout the majority of her employment, no law existed to prohibit a pre-retirement arrangement for returning to work with another participating employer, nor did a penalty exist for having a pre-retirement arrangement, nor did a rule exist that a bona fide separation must occur prior to resuming employment. Glover retired from LMPD on August 1, 2008. However, on June 27, 2008, the same day HB 1 took effect, Glover contacted the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office (JCSO) to inquire about future vacancies and completed an employment application.
On July 9, 2008, Sheriff Aubrey offered Glover employment as a full-time deputy with JCSO. Glover reported for duty at JCSO on September 2, 2008. JCSO notified KRS of Glover's hire. Jennifer Steele of the Kentucky Retirement Systems informed Sheriff Aubrey and Margaret Newton, JCSO's human resources supervisor, of HB 1 and the...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP