Priester v. Board of Appeals
165 A.3d 644
| Md. Ct. Spec. App. | 2017Background
- Theodore Priester, a Baltimore County Fire Captain since 1999 (department service since 1982), was accused after an internal investigation of repeatedly sexually harassing multiple female subordinates and creating a hostile work environment; he was suspended and then fired in 2013 after an administrative hearing where he pleaded no contest and expressed remorse.
- Allegations included unwanted touching, lewd comments and gestures, misuse of the women’s bathroom, intimidation of complainants, and threats; multiple current and former subordinates corroborated a pattern of conduct and fear of reporting due to his authority.
- Priester applied for a service retirement allowance (pension) in 2014; the Board of Trustees denied the application on the ground his service was not “honorable and faithful,” a statutory condition for creditable membership service and pension entitlement.
- An ALJ partially granted relief, excluding the years he served as captain (1999–2013) from creditable service but allowing a prorated pension for prior years; both parties appealed the ALJ’s split ruling.
- The Baltimore County Board of Appeals affirmed that Priester’s service was not honorable and faithful and reversed to deny the pension in full; the Circuit Court upheld that decision and Priester appealed to the Court of Special Appeals, which affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Priester’s Argument | Baltimore County’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vagueness of “honorable and faithful” | Terms are undefined in the Code and thus void for vagueness | Terms are common words with settled meanings and give adequate notice | Statute not void for vagueness; terms understandable and provide standards |
| Arbitrary application of the standard | Board applied an unprecedented, overly broad standard and acted arbitrarily | Board reasonably weighed facts; ad hoc discretion is required and consistent with Brown | Board’s application not arbitrary or capricious |
| Whether forfeiture may be partial or must be total | Priester: entitled to pension for prior 25+ years; ALJ could apportion | County: whole pension may be forfeited when service is tainted at retirement | Entire pension forfeiture consistent with Code and precedent; partial award not required |
| Sufficiency of evidence to support forfeiture | Priester: misconduct noncriminal, limited to later years, career otherwise commendable | County: multiple credible witnesses showed prolonged abuse of authority and hostile environment | Substantial evidence supports Board’s finding that service was not honorable and faithful |
Key Cases Cited
- Empls.’ Ret. Sys. of Baltimore Cnty. v. Brown, 186 Md. App. 293 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2009) (explains discretionary, case‑by‑case application of “honorable and faithful” and that serious misconduct can forfeit pension)
- Finucan v. Md. Bd. of Physicians Quality Assurance, 380 Md. 577 (Md. 2004) (void‑for‑vagueness analysis: fair notice and adequate standards are required)
- Bowers v. State, 283 Md. 115 (Md. 1978) (articulates vagueness doctrine criteria cited in administrative review)
- Williams v. State, 329 Md. 1 (Md. 1993) (common words can provide sufficient notice for statute enforcement)
- Meritor Sav. Bank, FSB v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57 (U.S. 1986) (recognition of hostile‑environment sexual harassment under Title VII)