Legal Opinion
O'Brien v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Board
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided February 18, 2010No. 09-P-533PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
At issue is whether certain contract-based remuneration received by O’Brien — holiday pay, a fitness bonus, a uniform allowance, longevity pay, and an educational differential — qualified as “regular compensation,” as that term is used in G. L. c. 32, § 1, as amended by St. 1979, c. 681, for the purpose of calculating his retirement allowance. Section 1 provides in pertinent part:
“ ‘Regular compensation’ . . . shall mean the salary, wages or other compensation in whatever form, lawfully determined for the individual service of the employee by the employing authority, not including bonus,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Robinson v. Contributory Retirement Appeal BoardMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1985
- Bulger v. Contributory Retirement Appeal BoardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2006
- Pelonzi v. Retirement BoardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2008
- Kozloski v. Contributory Retirement Appeal BoardMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2004
3Cited by2 opinions
- Parente v. State Board of RetirementMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2011
- Kearns v. State Board of RetirementMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2012