K.E.R.S. v. Foster
Decision Date | 05 October 2007 |
Docket Number | No. 2006-CA-002177-MR.,2006-CA-002177-MR. |
Citation | 272 S.W.3d 198 |
Parties | KENTUCKY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEMS, Appellant, v. Barbara FOSTER, Appellee. |
Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Katherine Rupinen, Frankfort, KY, for appellant.
Debra H. Dawahare, Leila G. O'Carra, Wyatt, Tarrant & Combs, LLP, Lexington, KY, for appellee.
Before KELLER, LAMBERT, and STUMBO, Judges.
Kentucky Employees Retirement Systems ("KERS") appeals the decision of the circuit court reversing KERS's decision to deny Barbara Foster's request to purchase service credit for the time she was employed as a professor at the University of Kentucky. For the reasons stated herein, we affirm the judgment below.
The parties do not dispute the pertinent facts in this case. Prior to her employment with the former Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet, the appellee, Barbara Foster, worked as a full-time professor at the University of Kentucky ("UK"). Consequently, looking to maximize her future state-government retirement benefits, Foster sought to purchase service credit for the time she was employed at UK. KERS denied her application. After exhausting her administrative remedies, Foster appealed to Franklin Circuit Court, which reversed KERS. KERS now appeals.
The parties acknowledge that Foster's eligibility to purchase service credit turns on the proper construction of the emphasized language in KRS 61.552(8):
Any employee participating in one (1) of the retirement systems administered by Kentucky Retirement Systems who has at least forty-eight (48) months' service if age sixty-five (65) or at least sixty (60) months' service if under age sixty-five (65) in the retirement systems administered by the Kentucky Retirement Systems, who formerly worked for a state university in a position which [1] would have qualified as a regular full-time position [2] had the university been a participating department, and who did not participate in a defined benefit retirement program at the university may obtain credit in the employee's account in the County Employees Retirement System, the Kentucky Employees Retirement System, or the State Police Retirement System for prior and current service by paying either retirement system a delayed contribution payment for the service he would have received had his period of university employment been covered by the County Employees, Kentucky Employees Retirement System, or State Police Retirement System. The delayed contribution payment shall not be picked up, as described in KRS 61.560(4), by the employer. Payment may be by lump sum, or the employee may pay by increments.
(Emphasis and numerals supplied.)
We review questions of statutory construction de novo. E.g., Liquor Outlet, LLC v. Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, 141 S.W.3d 378, 381 (Ky.App.2004).
Here, the statutory language mandates that we (1) assume that UK had been participating in the KERS when Foster taught there; and (2) ascertain whether her position would have been deemed a "full-time position." The answer to the relevant question is easily ascertained as KERS acknowledges in its brief that Foster's teaching position at UK was "full-time" both in terms of UK's reckoning and KERS's own reckoning. Consequently, we hold that, under the statutory test of KRS 61.552(8), Foster is...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Ky. Ret. Sys. v. Foster, No. 2009–CA–001369–MR.
...employed, did not qualify for any service credit. However, we upheld the circuit court's decision. See Kentucky Employees Retirement Systems v. Foster, 272 S.W.3d 198 (Ky.App.2007).2 The Supreme Court of Kentucky denied discretionary review of our decision on January 14, 2009. On February 1......
- Durham v. Peabody Coal Co., No. 2007-SC-000792-WC.
-
Coleman v. Ky. Ret. Sys., 2012-CA-001518-MR
...in the private sector authority to participate in the Retirement Systems. Coleman also maintains that Kentucky Employees Retirement Systems v. Foster, 272 S.W.3d 198 (Ky. App. 2007), supports her case based on its discussion of KRS 61.552. Foster, however, is distinguishable from the situat......
-
Sangster v. Ky. Bd. of Med. Licensure
...we will review the merits of Dr. Sangster's claims, and “review questions of statutory construction de novo.” Ky. Employees Ret. Sys. v. Foster, 272 S.W.3d 198, 200 (Ky.App.2007) (citation omitted). KRS 218A.202, provides, in relevant part: (6) The Cabinet for Health and Family Services sha......