Legal Opinion
Collatos v. Boston Retirement Board
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Decided February 5, 1986PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLiacos, J.
The outcome of this appeal depends on our interpretation of G. L. c. 32, § 15 (3A) (1984 ed.), a statute mandating the forfeiture of retirement benefits by public employees who have been convicted of certain offenses. The parties filed cross motions for summary judgment in the Superior Court. Judgment was entered for the plaintiff. The defendants appealed. We transferred the appeal to this court on our own motion.
The defendants argue that the language of the statute is to be construed broadly, so that conviction of a Federal offense will result in forfeiture of benefits. The plaintiff argues…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Hoffman v. Howmedica, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
- Hashimi v. KalilMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1983
- Cleary v. Cardullo's, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1964
- Condon v. HaitsmaMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1950
- Casey v. Massachusetts Electric Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1984
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Protective Life Insurance v. SullivanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997
- Doherty v. Retirement Board of MedfordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1997
- Commonwealth v. WilliamsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2012
- MacLean v. State Board of RetirementMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2000
- State Board of Retirement v. BulgerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2006
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.