Commonwealth v. Kentucky Retirement Systems
396 S.W.3d 833
| Ky. | 2013Background
- Plaintiffs are county employees in the County Employee Retirement System seeking a declaratory judgment on KRS 61.637(1)'s constitutionality.
- KRS 61.637(1) (as amended in 2008) suspends retirement payments upon reemployment by a public employer, with an SS Act-based exception.
- Plaintiffs filed in Franklin Circuit Court; Commonwealth moved to dismiss based on sovereign immunity; Retirement Systems joined as a party.
- Trial court denied the immunity dismissal; whether a declaratory judgment action is barred by immunity became the appeal issue.
- Court of Appeals affirmed; Retirement Systems argued Commonwealth is a proper party; AG may defend or opt out per KRS 418.075.
- This Court held sovereign immunity does not bar declaratory judgment actions against the Commonwealth and that naming the Commonwealth separately is unnecessary.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does sovereign immunity bar DJA against the Commonwealth? | Pltf: immunity waived by KRS 61.692 and 418.075. | Commonwealth: immunity applies; no express waiver relevant to declaratory actions. | Waiver exists; DJA against Commonwealth allowed. |
| Is Retirement Systems an adequate vehicle to reach the Commonwealth's interests? | Retirement Systems is an arm of the state; can sue/defend to raise constitutional issues. | AG could defend; Retirement Systems as necessary party suffices; duplication should be avoided. | Commonwealth can be sued via Retirement Systems; separate naming unnecessary. |
| Does declaratory judgment action require immunity analysis different from damages actions? | DJAs pose no immediate state funds loss; immunity not barrier. | State should be immune to declaratory actions on state laws and contracts. | DJAs may proceed; state is subject to scrutiny and not wholly immune. |
Key Cases Cited
- Rose v. Council for Better Education, Inc., 790 S.W.2d 186 (Ky. 1989) (no immunity for constitutional review of state action)
- Jones v. Board of Trustees of Kentucky Retirement Systems, 910 S.W.2d 710 (Ky. 1995) (general assembly review allowed in declaratory judgments)
- Comair, Inc. v. Lexington-Fayette Urban County Airport Corp., 295 S.W.3d 91 (Ky. 2009) (agency immunity depends on whether agency performs integral state function)
- Withers v. University of Kentucky, 939 S.W.2d 340 (Ky. 1997) (waiver must be explicit or overwhelmingly implied)
- Breathitt County Bd. of Educ. v. Prater, 292 S.W.3d 883 (Ky. 2009) (reiterates DJA ability and appellate paths)
- Revis v. Daugherty, 287 S.W.28 (Ky. 1926) (declaratory judgment purpose and controversy standard)
- Fontaine v. Dep’t of Finance, 249 S.W.2d 799 (Ky. 1952) (declaratory judgments may be brought alone or with claims)
- De Charette v. St. Matthews Bank & Trust Co., 283 S.W.410 (Ky. 1926) (origin of declaratory judgment act's relief purpose)