Nussbaum v. New York City Employees' Retirement System

New York Court of Appeals

Nussbaum v. New York City Employees' Retirement System

425 N.E.2d 869, 53 N.Y.2d 1018, 442 N.Y.S.2d 481, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 2547

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 9, 1981

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 425 N.E.2d 869 (Nussbaum v. New York City Employees' Retirement System) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Nussbaum v. New York City Employees' Retirement System, 425 N.E.2d 869, 53 N.Y.2d 1018, 442 N.Y.S.2d 481, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 2547 (N.Y. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be modified, with costs to defendant, in accordance with this memorandum, and, as so modified, affirmed.

For the reasons stated by the Appellate Division, plaintiff was not unconstitutionally denied vested pension rights by legislation which created an additional, optional pension plan. Plaintiff could have remained in the existing plan without any of his rights being impaired. It was his decision not to do so that caused the alleged change in his rights. Instead of dismissing the complaint in this declaratory judgment action, however, the Appellate Division should have declared the rights of the parties. Accordingly, the order of that court should be modified to declare the challenged legislation constitutional.

[1021]*1021Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.

Order modified, etc.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be modified, with costs to defendant, in accordance with this memorandum, and, as so modified, affirmed.

For the reasons stated by the Appellate Division, plaintiff was not unconstitutionally denied vested pension rights by legislation which created an additional, optional pension plan. Plaintiff could have remained in the existing plan without any of his rights being impaired. It was his decision not to do so that caused the alleged change in his rights. Instead of dismissing the complaint in this declaratory judgment action, however, the Appellate Division should have declared the rights of the parties. Accordingly, the order of that court should be modified to declare the challenged legislation constitutional.

[1021]*1021Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.

Order modified, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

425 N.E.2d 869, 53 N.Y.2d 1018, 442 N.Y.S.2d 481, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 2547, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nussbaum-v-new-york-city-employees-retirement-system-ny-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack