McFeely v. Pension Com'n of City of Hoboken
| Decision Date | 06 June 1950 |
| Parties | McFEELY v. PENSION COMMISSION OF CITY OF HOBOKEN. |
| Court | New Jersey Superior Court |
James F. McGovern, Jr., Jersey City, for the plaintiff.
Dominick R. Rinaldi, Hoboken, for the defendant.
Plaintiff has moved for a summary judgment.
It appears that plaintiff was a member of the Police Department of the City of Hoboken from July 1, 1931 to September 23, 1949, when he submitted his resignation which was accepted. While he was a member of the police department he served in various capacities from patrolman to acting chief, holding the rank of captain at the time of his resignation. All during this period, he was a member of the Police and Firemen's Pension Fund of the City of Hoboken and there was deducted from his salary in semi-monthly installments a total of $3,084.22, which was paid into the fund. The plaintiff requested the return of the amount so deducted, and the defendant, Pension Commission, refused to return the contributions paid, on the ground that it lacked authority to make such payment under the statute creating and empowering it to administer the fund.
The sole issue to be determined is whether the Police and Firemen's Pension Commission is empowered by the provisions of R.S. 43:16--1 et seq., N.J.S.A., to return the aforesaid contributions made into such fund during plaintiff's service as a member of the Police Department of the City of Hoboken.
The incidents of a pension fund are not such as to constitute a contractual or vested right between the employee and the municipality; and the employee has no rights except those based upon and within the pertinent statute. Laden v. Daly, 132 N.J.L. 440, 40 A.2d 780 (Sup.Ct.1945), affirmed 133 N.J.L. 314, 44 A.2d 212 (E. & A.1945). This is true even though compulsory deductions from the salaries of employees for the support of the pension fund were made. Bennett v. Lee, 104 N.J.L. 453, 142 A. 362 (Sup.Ct.1928). There is nothing within the pertinent statute (R.S. 43:16--1 et seq., N.J.S.A.) which empowers the pension commission to return to an employee the amounts deducted from the employee's salary and paid into the fund. That the Legislature intended that there be no return of such deductions is apparent from an examination of other pension statutes. Where the legislature intended to allow refunds from pension funds it has made specific provisions for such refunds. See R.S. 43:10--8, N.J.S.A. (county pensions and retirement); R.S. 43:13--10, N.J.S.A. (municipal pensions); R.S. 43:14--29, N.J.S.A. (State Retirement System); R.S. 18:13--65, N.J.S.A. (Teachers' Pension and Annuity Fund). See also R.S. 43:16A--11, N.J.S.A. (Police and Firemen's Retirement System (new)), which plaintiff concedes does not apply to the present...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reiser v. Pension Commission of Emp. Retirement System of Passaic County
...may be allowed. Spina v. Consolidated Police Pension Fund Comm'n, 41 N.J. 391, 197 A.2d 169 (1964), and McFeely v. Hoboken Pension Comm'n, 8 N.J.Super. 575, 73 A.2d 757 (Law Div.1950). Consequently, when the Legislature in 1949 altered the terms of plaintiff's pension benefits, by transferr......
-
Taylor v. Board of Ed. of Cabell County
...ex rel Phillip v. Public School Retirement System of City of Saint Louis, 364 Mo. 395, 262 S.W.2d 569; McFeely v. Pension Commission of City of Hoboken, 8 N.J.Super. 575, 73 A.2d 757; Laden v. Daly, 132 N.J.L. 440, 40 A.2d 780, affirmed, 133 N.J.L. 314, 44 A.2d 212; Moran v. Firemen's and P......
-
Pineman v. Oechslin
...for receiving benefits. See, e. g., Etherton v. Wyatt, 155 Ind.App. 440, 293 N.E.2d 43 (Ct.App.1973); McFeely v. Pension Comm'n, 8 N.J.Super. 575, 73 A.2d 757 (Law Div.1950); Creps v. Board of Firemen's Relief & Retirement Fund Trustees, 456 S.W.2d 434 (Tex.Civ.App.1970). Others hold that p......
-
Spina v. Consolidated Police and Firemen's Pension Fund Commission
...plans go both ways, see Feher's Estate v. Board of Trustees, 68 N.J.Super. 391, 172 A.2d 445 (App.Div.1961); McFeely v. Pension Comm'n, 8 N.J.Super. 575, 73 A.2d 757 (Law Div.1950), and neither approach can be said to be palpably unfair. Thus the employee's contribution, even though taken f......