Hooker v. Retirement Board of the Firemen's Annuity and Benefit Fund
972 N.E.2d 189
Ill. App. Ct.2012Background
- Two widows of Chicago firefighters seek declaratory judgment that the Retirement Board must include duty availability pay (DAP) in the current salary for calculating their 6-140 annuities under the Pension Code.
- Public Act 93-654 (amendment) expanded DAP inclusion and affected pension calculations; the widows seek retroactive application and class certification.
- Trial court granted Board summary judgment and denied class certification; the widows appealed.
- Court holds that 6-111(i) requires including DAP in the current salary for positions held by the decedents, and 6-140 uses the current salary attached to the position at death, not the decedent’s actual paid amount.
- Court rejects Board’s 6-142 argument to bar retroactive recalculation and determines class certification is proper under the Civil Procedure/Class Action standards.
- Court reverses and remands for calculation of annuities consistent with DAP inclusion and for class-certification proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is DAP includable in 6-140 annuity calculations? | Murphy argues DAP must be included. | Board argues DAP not included unless election under 6-111(j) is made. | Yes; include DAP in 6-140 calculations. |
| Does 6-142 bar retroactive adjustment for pre-amendment widows? | Murphy argues retroactive increase permitted by amendment; no new application required. | Board contends no recalculation for those not applying post-amendment. | 6-142 does not defeat retroactive recalculation for eligible widows. |
| Is class certification appropriate for the miscalculation issue? | Class action efficient to resolve common DAP-inclusion issue. | ARL precludes class actions in administrative review. | Class certification proper; ARL does not preclude; common questions predominate. |
Key Cases Cited
- Kozak v. Retirement Board of Firemen's Annuity & Benefit Fund, 95 Ill. 2d 211 (Ill. 1983) (DAP-inclusion and salary concepts in pension context)
- Bertucci v. Retirement Board of the Firemen’s Annuity & Benefit Fund, 351 Ill. App. 3d 368 (Ill. App. 2004) (precedent on 6-140 benefits and retroactivity)
- Board of Education of the City of Chicago v. Board of Trustees of the Public Schools Teachers’ Pension & Retirement Fund, 395 Ill. App. 3d 735 (Ill. App. 2009) (ARP and miscalculation as non-administrative decision; class action avenue)
- Michigan Avenue National Bank v. County of Cook, 191 Ill. 2d 493 (Ill. 2000) (statutory interpretation; plain language governing salary definitions)
- Purcell & Wardrope Chartered v. Hertz Corp., 175 Ill. App. 3d 1069 (Ill. App. 1988) (class certification framework; abuses of standard criteria)
- Avery v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 216 Ill. 2d 100 (Ill. 2005) (class action procedural guidance; bounds of discretion)
- Clark v. TAP Pharmaceutical Products, Inc., 343 Ill. App. 3d 538 (Ill. App. 2003) (common questions and predominance in class actions)
- Circle Management, LLC v. Olivier, 378 Ill. App. 3d 601 (Ill. App. 2007) (jurisdictional considerations in reviews; sua sponte concerns)