Malcom v. Newton County

Decision Date13 June 2000
Docket NumberNo. A00A0200.,A00A0200.
Citation535 S.E.2d 824,244 Ga. App. 464
PartiesMALCOM v. NEWTON COUNTY.
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Strauss & Walker, John T. Strauss, Covington, for appellant.

Smith, Welch, Studdard & Brittain, A.J. Welch, Jr., McDonough, Webb, Carlock, Copeland, Semler & Stair, Katharyne C. Johnson, for appellee.

ANDREWS, Presiding Judge.

Gerald D. Malcom, the former Sheriff of Newton County, sued Newton County claiming the County wrongfully terminated his retirement benefits under the County employee pension plan. Malcom appeals from the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the County and from the denial of his motion for summary judgment. For the reasons which follow, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and find that: (1) the County established a pension plan in which Malcom obtained a vested contractual right in consideration for his service as County Sheriff; and (2) the County's subsequent action excluding Malcom from the pension plan was a wrongful impairment of this right and was void.

From 1976 until December 31, 1996, Malcom served as the elected Sheriff of Newton County. As Sheriff, Malcom was not an employee of Newton County, but an elected constitutional officer of the County. On December 31, 1996, Malcom's last term of office as Sheriff expired. On the same day, a new Sheriff was sworn in and took office. Malcom was not employed by Newton County, nor did he hold elective office in the County, on or after January 1, 1997.

The employee pension plan at issue was established by Newton County in 1968, with a restated version of the plan being adopted in 1986. From 1968 through 1984, the County made no contributions to the pension plan, and employees who elected to participate in the plan were required to fund the plan by their own contributions. Beginning in 1984, the County pension plan became a noncontributory plan funded solely by County funds with no contributions by participating County employees. Malcom does not claim that he became a participant in the plan by contributing to it. In fact, he made no contributions to the plan during his tenure as Sheriff. Rather, he contends that he was included in the County pension plan when Newton County took action to allow its constitutional officers to participate in the plan in December 1996, less than one month before Malcom ended his last term of office as Sheriff.1

On December 3, 1996, the Newton County Board of Commissioners voted to include its three County constitutional officers,2 including Sheriff Malcom, in the County pension plan. Specifically, the Commission established that, effective December 1, 1996, the definition of employee in the County pension plan would include for purposes of pension plan participation the three nonemployee County constitutional officers, and that all past service would be credited for pension purposes. On December 10, 1996, the County pension plan was amended in writing to include the revisions embodied in the December 3 vote.

The amended County pension plan included a provision stating that, effective December 1, 1996, the term "employee" was defined to include the three constitutional officers, with all past service credited for pension purposes. The amended plan also provided that an employee became a participant in the plan by satisfying two eligibility requirements. First, the employee must have completed three years of service. Second, the employee became a participant in the plan on the "Plan Entry Date" coinciding with or immediately following the date on which the three-year service requirement was satisfied, but only if the employee was employed on the "Plan Entry Date." The amended plan stated that the "`Plan Entry Date' means the Effective Date and January 1st of every Plan (Calendar) Year." The "Effective Date" under the amended plan was defined as follows: "Effective Date. The original `Effective Date' of the Plan is December 1, 1968; this amendment is effective December 1, 1996." The County voted to partially fund the inclusion of the constitutional officers with existing County funds and to fund the balance from County funds paid yearly to the pension plan administrator over a period of ten to fifteen years.

On December 13, 1996, two new Newton County Commissioners who had been elected to the Board in a November 1996 special election took the oath of office and replaced two of the Commissioners who had voted on December 3, 1996, in favor of including the constitutional officers in the County pension plan. On December 17, 1996, the reconstituted Board of Commissioners voted to rescind the actions of the Board of Commissioners taken on December 3, 1996, and to remove the constitutional officers, including Sheriff Malcom, from the County pension plan. No funds were paid by Newton County to the pension plan administrator to fund the plan for the constitutional officers.

1. Based on these facts, the trial court found that, in order for Malcom to become a participant in the amended plan, he was required to be employed on the "Plan Entry Date," which the trial court determined could only be January 1, 1997. Since Malcom retired on December 31, 1996, the trial court ruled that he failed to satisfy the eligibility requirements for becoming a participant in the amended plan. Based on this ruling, the trial court further concluded that there was no merit to Malcom's contentions that he was an eligible participant in the amended plan, that he obtained vested contractual rights in the amended plan after it was established by the County during his tenure as Sheriff, and that the County wrongfully impaired his contractual rights when it later rescinded the amended plan.

We agree with Malcom that the trial court erred by finding that, because he was not the Sheriff or otherwise employed by the County on January 1, 1997, he was not an eligible participant in the amended plan. To be eligible, the amended plan required that Malcom be employed on the "Plan Entry Date." The amended plan stated that the "Plan Entry Date" means "the Effective Date and January 1st of every Plan (Calendar) Year." It follows that, if Malcom was employed as Sheriff on the "Effective Date" as defined by the amended plan, this would satisfy the requirement that he be employed on the "Plan Entry Date."

The definition of "Effective Date" in the amended plan contains two statements: "[t]he original `Effective Date' of the Plan is December 1, 1968" and "this amendment is effective December 1, 1996." We conclude that this definition makes reference to two effective dates—the original effective date of the plan in 1968, and a December 1, 1996 effective date specifically applicable to the amended plan's inclusion of the three constitutional officers. Although there may be...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Dekalb Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. Gold
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • November 20, 2012
    ...431 (1980); see Plymel v. Teachers Retirement Sys., 281 Ga. 409, 412(4), 637 S.E.2d 379 (2006). See also Malcom v. Newton County, 244 Ga.App. 464, 467–468, 535 S.E.2d 824 (2000) (finding that the fact that appellant made no contribution to the county-funded plan did not render the pension a......
  • Grech v. Clayton County, Ga.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • July 7, 2003
    ...v. Joiner, 101 Ga. 190, 28 S.E. 679 (1897); Haralson County v. Kimball, 243 Ga.App. 559, 533 S.E.2d 762 (2000); Malcom v. Newton County, 244 Ga.App. 464, 535 S.E.2d 824 (2000); Mayo v. Fulton County, 220 Ga.App. 825, 470 S.E.2d 258 (1996); Landis v. Rockdale County, 206 Ga.App. 876, 427 S.E......
  • Walker v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • July 12, 2013
    ... ... ELLINGTON, Presiding Judge. [323 Ga.App. 558]A Houston County jury found Ernest Walker guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of possession of cocaine with intent to ... ...
  • Dekalb Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. Gold
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • October 21, 2019
    ...which the employer can withhold at will. A pension is adjusted compensation for services rendered"); Malcolm v. Newton Cty. , 244 Ga. App. 464, 467 (1), 535 S.E.2d 824 (2000) (same); City of Athens v. McGahee , 178 Ga. App. 76, 341 S.E.2d 855 (1986) ; Dinnan v. Totis , 159 Ga. App. 352, 283......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT