Dussia v. Merman, Docket No. 9128
| Decision Date | 27 October 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 2,Docket No. 9128,2 |
| Citation | 183 N.W.2d 583,27 Mich.App. 398 |
| Parties | Vallie W. DUSSIA, now deceased, by Rev. Emil J. Dussia, Administrator of the Estate of Vallie W. Dussia, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. L. E. MERMAN, Violet Manak, Donald Doty, James Stanifer, Maurice Rauch and John Kryston, Secretary, not individually but as the Board of Trustees of the Monroe County Employees Retirement System, Defendants-Appellants |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US |
Frank J. Kelley, Atty. Gen., Robert A. Derengoski, Sol. Gen., James J. Rostash, Pros. Atty., for defendants-appellants.
Thomas E. Griffin, Monroe, for plaintiff-appellee.
Before QUINN, P.J., and McGREGOR and BRONSON, JJ.
Prior to his retirement on December 31, 1964, plaintiff's decedent had been probate judge of Monroe county for 16 years. Before his death on March 2, 1969, plaintiff's decedent brought this action to require the Board of Trustees of the Monroe County Employees Retirement System to grant him pension benefits. Plaintiff prevailed below and defendant appeals.
The controlling issue is whether the Monroe County Employees Retirement System was in effect while plaintiff's decedent was a county employee.
During its February 1965 meeting, the Monroe County Board of Supervisors adopted a pension plan retroactive to November 30, 1964. At the same session, a motion to amend the retroactive date to January 1, 1965 was defeated. A subsequent motion to amend the effective date of the plan was also defeated.
As required by M.C.L.A. § 46.12a (Stat.Ann.1970 Cum.Supp. 5.333(1)), this plan was submitted to the county pension plan committee for approval. The committee declined approval and required six amendments to the plan, none of which involved the effective date. At its June 1965 meeting, the Monroe County Board of Supervisors made the required six amendments and also made the effective date of the plan the first day of the month next succeeding its approval by the county pension plan committee. The effective date became July 1, 1965.
Rule 21 of the Board of Supervisors was in effect during this entire period and it provided:
'Any member who votes with the majority on any question may move for its reconsideration on the same day or the day following (on which sessions of the board are held), but not later, and no question shall be reconsidered more than once.'
The trial court ruled and plaintiff contends on appeal that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dussia v. Merman, 5
...in February of 1965 and the Board of Supervisors could not reconsider that date under their own rules. 1 The Court of Appeals, 27 Mich.App. 398, 183 N.W.2d 583, reversed on the ground that the plan was not 'effective or operative' under the statute until approved by the County Pension Plan ......