Teachers' Retirement Bd. v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd.

Decision Date10 January 1964
Citation195 N.E.2d 318,346 Mass. 663
PartiesTEACHERS' RETIREMENT BOARD v. CONTRIBUTORY RETIREMENT APPEAL BOARD et al.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

William J. Wallace, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.

Paul F. X. Powers, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

Andrew F. McCarthy, Worcester, for intervener, Mary C. Nolan.

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

WHITTEMORE, Justice.

This appeal in a proceeding for review under the State Administrative Procedure Act (G.L. c. 30A, §§ 14, 15) is taken by the Teachers' Retirement Board (Retirement Board) from a final decree of the Superior Court. That decree affirmed a decision of the Contributory Retirement Appeal Board (Appeal Board) which, under G.L. c. 32, § 16(4), reversed a decision of the Retirement Board and directed it to pay accidental death benefits to Mary C. Nolan, the intervener, under G.L. c. 32, § 9(1).

Mrs. Nolan's application to the Retirement Board for accidental death benefits was based on the death of her husband, Francis T. Nolan, on February 11, 1958.

At the hearing before the Appeal Board the parties agreed to facts in part as follows: the deceased (Nolan) had been a teacher in the Clinton High School. On February 6, 1958, the school building was destroyed by fire. Nolan was given permission by a police officer 'to enter the burning building in order to obtain his mid-year examinations which had already been corrected.' Nolan was in the building from fifteen to twenty minutes and when he returned he appeared very excited and upset. In the period after the fire he was worried about where classes would be held and that his pay checks might not continue. He cancelled appointments on February 8, because 'he did not feel good.' Nolan sat up until 1:45 A.M. February 11, discussing with his wife what would happen at a meeting called on that day to make arrangements to continue the school program. Nolan attended the meeting of teachers and school officials on Tuesday, February 11, 1958, and seven minutes thereafter died of an acute coronary thrombosis. Nolan 'was in perfect health up until the time of the fire.' Mrs. Nolan testified that Nolan had been in perfect physical health up to the time of the fire, that in the period after the fire he complained of indigestion, chest pains and shortness of breath; 'he wasn't sleeping right.' Some other facts were agreed to or put in evidence as to the extent of Nolan's excitement following the fire, but they were not included in the hypothetical question to the medical expert.

A physician, who the Retirement Board agreed was qualified, testified on the basis of the substance of the foregoing facts that Nolan's death was the natural and proximate result of the experience in the burning building and that there was a 'direct relationship between his experience in the burning building and the onset of his symptoms as a result of that and his death.' There was no significant cross-examination.

The Appeal Board found that the deceased 'did suffer an injury in the course of his employment, which injury was the cause of his death within the meaning of the statute.' The judge in the Superior Court ruled that Nolan suffered an injury 'in the course of his employment and in the course of his duties as a teacher * * * and died as the natural and proximate result.'

General Laws c. 32, § 9(1), authorized payments to the beneficiaries '[i]f the board * * * finds that * * * [the] member * * * died as the natural and proximate result of a personal injury sustained or a hazard undergone as a result of, and while in the performance of, his duties at some definite place and at some definite time * * *.'

The Retirement Board's...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Namay v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd.
    • United States
    • Appeals Court of Massachusetts
    • March 8, 1985
    ...Retirement v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd., 342 Mass. 58, 60-61, 172 N.E.2d 234 (1961); Teachers' Retirement Bd. v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd., 346 Mass. 663, 195 N.E.2d 318 (1964); Easthampton Contributory Retirement Bd. v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd., 347 Mass. 777, 1......
  • Lisbon v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd.
    • United States
    • Appeals Court of Massachusetts
    • September 4, 1996
    ...(2) no contrary medical evidence. 20 Mass.App.Ct. at 636-641, 482 N.E.2d 514. See also Teachers' Retirement Bd. v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd., 346 Mass. 663, 665-667, 195 N.E.2d 318 (1964). 4. As noted earlier (note 5, supra ) a court may not set aside a CRAB decision, not otherwise......
  • Fitzgibbons' Case, In re
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
    • March 15, 1978
    ...Mass. 11, 116 N.E.2d 844 (1954); Charon's Case, 321 Mass. 694, 75 N.E.2d 511 (1947). See also Teachers' Retirement Bd. v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd., 346 Mass. 663, 195 N.E.2d 318 (1964); Baruffaldi v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd., 337 Mass. 495, 150 N.E.2d 269 We conclude tha......
  • Robinson v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd.
    • United States
    • Appeals Court of Massachusetts
    • October 2, 1985
    ...of the hearing officer (and CRAB), and expert testimony was required to guide him. See Teachers' Retirement Bd. v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd., 346 Mass. 663, 666, 195 N.E.2d 318 (1964); King's Case, 352 Mass. 488, 490, 225 N.E.2d 900 (1967). See also Murphy's Case, 328 Mass. 301, 30......
  • 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