Herrick v. Essex Regional Retirement Board, 465 Mass. 801

Herrick, a public employee, was a member of a retirement system for 27 years.
He resigned in May 2003 after being charged with sexual offenses; later pled guilty and was sentenced.
The Essex regional retirement board denied his application for superannuation benefits on grounds of forfeiture due to moral turpitude.
CRAB and a Division of Administrative Law Appeals magistrate affirmed the board’s denial.
In 2009, a Superior Court judge reversed and ordered benefits retroactive to resignation date.
The board subsequently paid $191,165.76 without interest; Herrick sought interest under G. L. c. 231, § 6C, later addressing § 6H and § 20 (5) (c) (2).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 6C applies to this action for retroactive retirement benefits.	Herrick argues action is contractual and § 6C applies.	Board contends the dispute is not contractual; § 6C does not apply.	No; § 6C does not apply because the action is not based on a contractual obligation.
Whether § 6H applies or is superseded by other law requiring actuarial adjustment.	Herrick seeks § 6H interest from suit commencement.	Board argues § 6H is inapplicable where law provides the rate via actuarial equivalent under § 20 (5) (c) (2).	§ 6H does not apply because § 20 (5) (c) (2) provides the applicable rate via actuarial equivalence.
Whether § 25 (5) creates a contractual right to benefits sufficient to trigger contractual interest.	§ 25 (5) recognizes a contractual-like right to vested benefits.	§ 25 (5) provides a nontraditional contractual protection, not a full contract.	§ 25 (5) creates a limited, non-full contract right; not enough to render § 6C applicable.

Lexington v. Bedford, 378 Mass. 562 (1979) (retirement benefits not fully contractual; expectations protected)
State Bd. of Retirement v. Woodward, 446 Mass. 698 (2006) (forfeiture not an action in contract; appointment of remedial interest)
Boston Retirement Bd. v. McCormick, 345 Mass. 692 (1963) (recognizes board error correction; actuarial adjustment context)
Thibodeau v. Seekonk, 52 Mass. App. Ct. 69 (2001) (Thibodeau II; interest recovery under § 6C for back pay context)
Thibodeau v. Seekonk, 40 Mass. App. Ct. 367 (1996) (Thibodeau I; restoration and back pay context)
Opinion of the Justices, 364 Mass. 847, 364 Mass. 847 (1973) (contractual understanding of retirement rights; nontraditional contract)
Robinson v. Teachers’ Retirement Bd., 414 Mass. 340 (1993) (benefits not contractual; supports non-contractual basis for § 6C/6H analysis)
Woodward, 446 Mass. 698, 446 Mass. 698 (2006) (pension forfeiture; limitations on contract-based remedies)