• Louis Calabrese v. Hampden County Regional Retirement Board, CR-08-329 (DALA, 2010)

    Elected official who joined Retirement System within ninety days of assuming his fifth term in office, pursuant to G.L. c. 32, § 3(2)(a)(vi), and retired six months after joining not precluded from receiving a superannuation retirement allowance by G.L. c. 32, § 3(6)(e) two-year active service requirement.
  • Kenneth Gavin v. Teachers' Retirement System, CR-06-342 (DALA, 2008)

    The Petitioner's salary that he received for serving as an adjunct professor at Cape Cod Community College (CCCC) was determined not to be regular compensation for the purposes of the calculation of his superannuation retirement benefit. The decision was based on the fact that the Petitioner was not a member of the State Retirement System or any other retirement system during the course of his employment at CCCC.
  • Elaine Nan-Geller v. Teachers' Retirement Board, CR-05-1273 (DALA, 2009)

    Respondent’s decision denying a former public school teacher’s application for a termination retirement allowance pursuant to M.G.L. c. 32, § 10(2) is reversed. The teacher, who met the age and creditable service requirements of the statute, demonstrated that she was removed or discharged from her teaching position, without moral turpitude on her part, on grounds for terminating a teacher with professional teaching status that are specified by M.G.L. c. 71, § 42, and there is no evidence that her dismissal or removal was “for violation of the laws, rules and regulations applicable to [her] office or position” or was brought about by “collusion or conspiracy,” see M.G.L. c. 32, § 10(2)(c).
  • Neil Hansen v. State Board of Retirement, CR-07-442 (DALA 2009)

    An engineer in the highway department was not entitled to a termination allowance pursuant to G.L. c. 32, sec. 10(2), where he had signed a "last chance agreement" and was terminated for violating the last chance agreement, which was a violation of the rules applicable to his position.
  • Sundar Panditv. State Board of Retirement, CR-07-508 (DALA, 2009)

    The evidence shows here that Mr. Pandit was terminated in 2007 for attendance problems that violated the rules of the Department of Revenue. Accordingly, I affirm the decision of the State Board of Retirement to deny Mr. Pandit a termination retirement allowance.