Porter v. Loehr
| Decision Date | 07 December 1928 |
| Docket Number | No. 18718.,18718. |
| Citation | 163 N.E. 689,332 Ill. 353 |
| Parties | PORTER v. LOEHR et al. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Taxpayer's action by J. W. Porter against Leon L. Loehr and others. From a decree of dismissal, complainant appeals.
Reversed and remanded, with directions.
Appeal from Superior Court, Cook County; Oscar Hebel, Judge.
Shannon & Morrill, Robert N. Holt, and Floyd E. Britton, all of Chicago, for appellant.
Samuel A. Ettelson, Corp. Counsel, Thomas F. Reilly and George H. Mason, all of Chicago (Joseph F. Grossman, Milton D. Smith, and George F. Mulligan, all of Chicago, of counsel), for appellees.
J. W. Porter, in behalf of himself and such other taxpayers of the city of Chicago as might join with him, filed a bill of complaint in the superior court of Cook county to restrain the members and officers of the retirement board of the policemen's annuity and benefit fund of the city of Chicago from paying pensions to former policemen in excess of the amounts allowed them by the laws in force at the times of their respective retirements, on the ground that certain acts passed by the Fifty-fifth General Assembly purporting to authorize such increases were unconstitutional and void. The defendants answered the bill. Shortly thereafter 371 former policemen by their petition sought to be made additional defendants. The prayer of their petition was granted. They first interposed a demurrer to the bill, but later withdrew the demurrer, and adopted the answer of the original defendants. By agreement the cause was submitted to the court upon the bill and answer. A decree was rendered by which the bill was dismissed for want of equity. From that decree the complainant prosecutes this appeal.
An act entitled ‘An act to provide for the setting apart, formation and disbursement of a police pension fund in cities having a population exceeding two hundred thousand inhabitants' (Cahill's Stat. 1925, p. 461; Smith's Stat. 1925, p. 485), approved June 29, 1915, became effective on the 1st day of July of that year. The pertinent provisions of certain sections of the act as amended and in force on June 30, 1921, were as follows: Section 1 provided for the creation, maintenance, and disbursement, as prescribed in the act, of a pension fund for policemen in cities having a population of 200,000 or more. By section 2 a board of five members charged with the disbursement of the fund and the designation of its beneficiaries was created. This board was known as the board of trustees of the police pension fund of the city in which it was established. Section 3 authorized the payment to a policeman, in a city of the requisite population, retiring at the age of 50 years or more, and after 20 years' service, of a pension equal to one-half of the salary attached to the rank which he held for one year immediately preceding his retirement. The maximum annual pension, however, was fixed at $1,300 for a general superintendent of police, $1,150 for a first deputy superintendent of police, $1,100 for a captain of police, and $1,000 for a lieutenant of police. All other policemen retired, it was provided, should receive not less than $600, nor more than $900, per annum.
Section 4 made provision for the payment of a pension to any policeman who became physically disabled while in, and in consequence of, the performance of police duty. This pension should not exceed one-half of the salary attached to his rank at the time of his retirement, and the maximum and minimum figures were the same as fixed by section 3. Whenever the disability ended, the pension ceased, and the policeman thereupon becamereinstated in the department in the rank held by him at the time of his retirement. Section 5 provided for the payment of the pension described in section 3 to the widow and children of a policeman who lost his life or received injuries resulting in death while in, and in consequence of, the performance of police duty. Provision was also made by this section for the payment of a pension to the widow and children of a policeman who died from other causes, or who should be legally adjudged insane.
Section 9 provided that the pension fund should consist, among others, of deductions, made by the city comptroller, of 2 1/2 per cent. of the salaries or wages paid to policemen. The city was authorized to levy a tax, not exceeding six-tenths of a mill on the dollar, upon the taxable property of the city, in such sum as would, when added to the deductions from the salaries or wages of policemen and the receipts available from other sources, yield sufficient income to pay the pensions authorized by the act. By section 10 the board of trustees of the police pension fund was given exclusive control and management of the fund.
An act entitled ‘An act to provide for the creation, setting apart, maintenance, and administration of a policemen's annuity and benefit fund in cities having a population exceeding two hundred thousand inhabitants' (Cahill's Stat. 1925, p. 466; Smith's Stat. 1925, p. 497), was approved on June 29, 1921, and became effective on the 1st day of July of the same year. The pertinent sections of that act as amended and in force June 30, 1927, are as follows: Section 1 provides that in each city of the state having a population exceeding 200,000 a policemen's annuity and benefit fund shall be created, set apart, maintained, and administered as prescribed in the act. Section 2 makes provision for a board of seven trustees, which is charged with the duty of administering the annuity and benefit fund. This board is known as the retirement board of the policemen's annuity and benefit fund of the particular city. By section 11 any such city is authorized to levy a tax, not exceeding one and six-tenths mills on the dollar of the assessed valuation of all taxable property in the city, for the purpose of providing revenue for the annuity and benefit fund.
Section 50 provides that this fund shall, on the 1st day of January following the year in which the act becomes effective in any city, supersede any police pension fund there in operation by virtue of the act of June 29, 1915, as amended; that all moneys, securities, and other assets of an existing police pension fund shall be transferred on such 1st day of January to the retirement board of the annuity and benefit fund, and that all annuities, pensions, and other benefits allowed by the board of trustees of such police pension fund prior to the same 1st day of January shall thereafter be paid by the retirement board from the annuity and benefit fund, ‘according to the law or laws under which such annuities, pensions or other benefits were allowed.’ Section 51 provides that, for the purpose of paying annuities, pensions, and benefits which have been or shall be allowed by authority of the act of June 29, 1915, as amended, or under certain sections of the instant act, any city in which the later act becomes effective shall contribute to the annuity and benefit fund, annually, a sum not in excess of $1,700,000.
By an amendatory act approved July 7, 1927 (Laws of 1927, p. 271; Cahill's Stat. 1927, pp. 475, 476; Smith's Stat. 1927, pp. 525, 526), the provision of section 3 of the act of June 29, 1915, as amended, that the retired policeman shall be paid a pension equal to one-half of the salary attached to his rank for one year immediately prior to his retirement, and the provision of section 4 that the disabled policeman shall be paid a pension not exceeding one-half of his salary at the time of his retirement, together with the schedule in both sections fixing the maximum and minimum pensions to be paid, were eliminated, and there was substituted in each of these sections the provision that the policeman, after his retirement, shall be paid annually, in equal monthly installments, according to his rank at any time, as follows: Patrolman or police operator, $960, sergeant $1,080, lieutenant, $1,200, and captain or a superior rank, $1,300.
The same General Assembly amended various sections of the act of June 29, 1921, as amended. Sections 11, 50, and 51 were amended by an act approved July 7, 1927. Laws of 1927, p. 293; Cahill's Stat. 1927, pp. 483, 499, 500-502; Smith's Stat. 1927, pp. 540, 556-558. The maximum tax rate which by authority of section 11 might be levied for the purpose of providing revenue for the annuity and benefit fund was, for the period of eleven years from January 1, 1928, increased from one and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Berman v. Bd. of Educ. of City of Chicago
-
McClead v. Pima County
...provisions similar to Arizona's extra compensation clause, have invalidated post-retirement benefit increases. See, e.g., Porter v. Loehr, 163 N.E. 689 (Ill.1928) (amendments authorizing raising tax money to increase benefits to retired police officers violated constitutional extra compensa......
-
Dodge v. Board of Education of City of Chicago
...Retirement Board, 331 Ill. 193, 162 N.E. 859. Appellants urge that the authority of the foregoing cases has been shaken by Porter v. Loehr, 332 Ill. 353, 163 N.E. 689, and DeWolf v. Bowley, 355 Ill. 530, 189 N.E. 893, but these cases did not deal with the question presented in the instant c......
-
McFarlane v. Hotz
...of the terms of the Retirement Fund Act, indicate they are more beneficial to the position of the appellees. The case of Porter v. Loehr, 332 Ill. 353, 163 N.E. 689, cited by appellants, does not apply because the police pensioner there involved had been retired, and the statute involved at......