Murphy v. City of Boston

• Decision Date: 13 May 1958
• Citation: 150 N.E.2d 542,337 Mass. 560
• Parties: William J. MURPHY v. CITY OF BOSTON et al.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

Page 542

150 N.E.2d 542

337 Mass. 560

William J. MURPHY v. CITY OF BOSTON et al.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

Argued April 7, 1958.

Decided May 13, 1958.

Paul A. Murphy, Abington, for plaintiff.

William H. Kerr, Boston, for defendant.

Before WILKINS, C. J., and RONAN, SPALDING, WHITTEMORE and CUTTER, JJ.

WHITTEMORE, Justice.

This is an amended bill in equity, filed November 14, 1957, for a declaratory decree under G.L. c. 231A, in which a veteran upon applying for retirement from employment in the school department of the city of Boston asks a determination of the amount of his annual retirement pay under G.L. c. 32, § 58, ¹ as amended. The plaintiff has appealed to this court from the final decree adjudging the amount to be sixty-five per cent of $6,056 rather than of $7,856 as the plaintiff contends.

The plaintiff and the defendants (the city of Boston and its mayor) stipulated that the cause be determined upon the facts stated and admitted in the pleadings, as being all the material ultimate facts, so that the Superior Court and any appellate court should be at liberty to draw inferences as if the pleadings were a case stated. See G.L. (Ter.Ed.) c. 231, § 126. Stuart v. Sargent, 283 Mass. 536, 541, 186 N.E. 649.

The relevant facts stated and admitted in the pleadings are set forth in this and following paragraphs. The plaintiff, a veteran, on June 4, 1957, applied to the mayor of the city of Boston, as the retiring authority for the city under G.L. c. 32, § 58, for retirement from active service under that statute at sixty-five per cent of $7,856, alleging that he was then employed as 'master and teacher-coach' in the Brighton High School and that the sum stated was 'the highest annual rate of compensation' payable to him while he was holding the grade then held by him. The plaintiff from September, 1917, through June, 1924, served the city as a temporary teacher in the school department for a total of one hundred sixty-three days. On May 2, 1927, the plaintiff was appointed by the school committee as a teacher at the Brighton High School with the title of 'junior master' effective May 1, 1927. The plaintiff has been continuously in the service of the city since that date. On May 1, 1940, he automatically became a teacher with the title of 'master,' and the sum of $6,056 was the highest annual rate of compensation payable to the plaintiff for his services as a master.

There were annual votes appointing the plaintiff as a coash or play teacher, for the then current school year, as follows: On November 4, 1929, as teacher-coach; on October 6, 1930, as play teacher; on November 16, 1931, as play teacher; on November 7, 1938, as teacher-coach for the portion of the school year after November 1, 1938; in each of the months October, 1939, October, 1940, October, 1941, September, 1942, September, 1943, October, 1944, October, 1945, and September, 1946, as teacher-coach. Beginning in September, 1947, the school committee in or for each school year through 1956-1957 gave the plaintiff three appointments as coash. The votes in the 1947-1948 school year were: September 10, 1947, as a teacher-coash for the 1947 football season; December 11, 1947, as a teacher-coach for the 1947-1948 indoor track season; March 23, 1948, as a teacher-coash for the 1948 spring baseball season. Except for a difference in the month or day of the vote, and that the 1956 appointment for the football season was as assistant teacher-coach, the votes were the same in the succeeding school years. On June 24, 1957, the plaintiff was appointed as an assistant teacher-coach for the 1957 football season. Under each of the votes the plaintiff served in the rank and for the period specified. The term school year was used to denote the period beginning on the first day of September and ending on the last day of August of the ensuing year, and the other terms were used to mean as follows: football season, a period of seventy days; indoor track season, a period of sixty days; spring baseball season, a period of seventy days.

On June 4, 1957, the highest annual compensation payable to the plaintiff for his service as teacher-coach had been $1,800, 'there being two hundred days of coaching each school year and the salary schedule adopted * * * for the September 1, 1954-August 31, 1955, school year having fixed as the daily rate of compensation for a teacher-coach in a high school the sum of $9.'

The mayor had not approved the application, contending that the amount at which the plaintiff was entitled to be retired is sixty-five per cent of $6,056.

We think that the decree below was in error and that the annual retirement compensation of the plaintiff under c. 32, § 58, is sixty-five per cent of $7,856.

For many years the plaintiff was in the employ of the school department doing the work of a teacher-master and a teacher-coach at the same school. The appointment as teacher-coach required that services be rendered on more days than the total for which the statute requires that municipalities maintain schools for the instruction of all children. Chapter 71, § 1, begins, 'Every town [this includes cities, c. 4, § 7, Thirty-fourth] shall maintain, for at least one hundred and sixty days in each school year * * * a sufficient number of schools * * *.' Thus...