South Carolina Police Officers Retirement System v. City of Spartanburg, No. 23184
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina |
| Writing for the Court | TOAL; GREGORY |
| Citation | 301 S.C. 188,391 S.E.2d 239 |
| Parties | S.C. POLICE OFFICERS RETIREMENT SYSTEM, Appellant, v. CITY OF SPARTANBURG, Respondent. . Heard |
| Decision Date | 23 January 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. 23184 |
Page 239
v.
CITY OF SPARTANBURG, Respondent.
Decided March 19, 1990.
Page 240
[301 S.C. 189] Deputy Atty. Gen. James Patrick Hudson and Senior Asst. Atty. Gen. Kenneth P. Woodington, Columbia, for appellant.
T.E. Walsh and William E. Walsh, both of Gaines & Walsh, Spartanburg, for respondent.
TOAL, Justice:
This case involves a municipal employer's refusal to contribute its share to the South Carolina Police Officers Retirement System to enable an employee to upgrade his retirement benefits. The employee failed to file a written request and pay his special contribution prior to retirement in strict compliance with the governing statute. S.C.Code Ann. § 9-11-210(3).
In this case, Winston Loftis was an employee of the City of Spartanburg. His employment was terminated on February 4, 1986, after he had suffered a heart attack. On that same date, a request was made by the City of Spartanburg to the South Carolina Police Officers Retirement System for an estimate of his disability payments. On April 8, 1986, the Medical Board of South Carolina Retirement Systems approved Loftis' application for disability retirement. Loftis made an oral request prior to May 6, 1986, to have calculated the cost for upgrading his benefits from Class I to Class II. The calculations were given to Loftis on June 16, 1986. He received his first retirement check on May 31, 1986. He paid his special contribution in the amount of $11,631.97 on July 18, 1986. For Mr. Loftis, the difference between Class I and II benefits is approximately $500 per month.
The Retirement System then notified the City that it was required to make its contribution in the amount of $6,693.36 pursuant to § 9-11-220(2)(b). The City refused on the grounds that Loftis had failed to make a written request and pay his special contribution prior to retirement.
An Order dated August 22, 1988, was issued by the trial judge holding that the City did not have to make the[301 S.C. 190] contribution because Loftis has failed to make a written request and failed to pay the contribution prior to retirement. The Retirement System appeals.
Subsection (3) of § 9-11-210 provides that an employee may upgrade his benefits by filing a written notice and paying his special contribution prior to retirement. The Retirement System contends that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hutto v. S.C. Ret. Sys., No. 13–1523.
...See, e.g., Kennedy v. S.C. Ret. Sys., 345 S.C. 339, 549 S.E.2d 243, 251 (2001) ; S.C. Police Officers Ret. Sys. v. City of Spartanburg, 301 S.C. 188, 391 S.E.2d 239, 241 (1990).At bottom, we conclude that the relevant indicators strongly indicate that the Retirement System and the Trust are......
-
Hutto v. S.C. Ret. Sys., No. 13–1523.
...See, e.g., Kennedy v. S.C. Ret. Sys., 345 S.C. 339, 549 S.E.2d 243, 251 (2001); S.C. Police Officers Ret. Sys. v. City of Spartanburg, 301 S.C. 188, 391 S.E.2d 239, 241 (1990). At bottom, we conclude that the relevant indicators strongly indicate that the Retirement System and the Trust are......
-
Hutto v. S.C. Ret. Sys., No. 13–1523.
...See, e.g., Kennedy v. S.C. Ret. Sys., 345 S.C. 339, 549 S.E.2d 243, 251 (2001); S.C. Police Officers Ret. Sys. v. City of Spartanburg, 301 S.C. 188, 391 S.E.2d 239, 241 (1990). At bottom, we conclude that the relevant indicators strongly indicate that the Retirement System and the Trust are......
-
Stogsdill v. Anthony Keck & the S.C. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., C/A No. 3:12-cv-0007-JFA
...Servs. Fin. Comm'n, 303 S.C. 143, 147, 399 S.E.2d 434, 436 (Ct. App. 1990); S.C. Police Officers Retirement Sys. v. City of Spartanburg, 301 S.C. 188, 391 S.E.2d 239 (1990); Doe v. S. Carolina Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 398 S.C. 62, 80, 727 S.E.2d 605, 614 (2011); Byerly Hosp. v. S......
-
Hutto v. S.C. Ret. Sys., No. 13–1523.
...See, e.g., Kennedy v. S.C. Ret. Sys., 345 S.C. 339, 549 S.E.2d 243, 251 (2001) ; S.C. Police Officers Ret. Sys. v. City of Spartanburg, 301 S.C. 188, 391 S.E.2d 239, 241 (1990).At bottom, we conclude that the relevant indicators strongly indicate that the Retirement System and the Trust are......
-
Hutto v. S.C. Ret. Sys., No. 13–1523.
...See, e.g., Kennedy v. S.C. Ret. Sys., 345 S.C. 339, 549 S.E.2d 243, 251 (2001); S.C. Police Officers Ret. Sys. v. City of Spartanburg, 301 S.C. 188, 391 S.E.2d 239, 241 (1990). At bottom, we conclude that the relevant indicators strongly indicate that the Retirement System and the Trust are......
-
Hutto v. S.C. Ret. Sys., No. 13–1523.
...See, e.g., Kennedy v. S.C. Ret. Sys., 345 S.C. 339, 549 S.E.2d 243, 251 (2001); S.C. Police Officers Ret. Sys. v. City of Spartanburg, 301 S.C. 188, 391 S.E.2d 239, 241 (1990). At bottom, we conclude that the relevant indicators strongly indicate that the Retirement System and the Trust are......
-
Stogsdill v. Anthony Keck & the S.C. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., C/A No. 3:12-cv-0007-JFA
...Servs. Fin. Comm'n, 303 S.C. 143, 147, 399 S.E.2d 434, 436 (Ct. App. 1990); S.C. Police Officers Retirement Sys. v. City of Spartanburg, 301 S.C. 188, 391 S.E.2d 239 (1990); Doe v. S. Carolina Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 398 S.C. 62, 80, 727 S.E.2d 605, 614 (2011); Byerly Hosp. v. S......