Palmer v. Board of Selectmen

335 N.E.2d 349, 368 Mass. 620, 1975 Mass. LEXIS 1027
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedSeptember 29, 1975
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 335 N.E.2d 349 (Palmer v. Board of Selectmen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Palmer v. Board of Selectmen, 335 N.E.2d 349, 368 Mass. 620, 1975 Mass. LEXIS 1027 (Mass. 1975).

Opinion

Hennessey, J.

In this case we are called on to decide whether G. L. c. 41, § 108L,1 establishing a career incentive pay program for certain regular full time police officers, includes an officer who gained his baccalaureate degree before being appointed to his town police department and before his town had adopted § 108L. Salary increases are based on credit points for semester hours completed.2 The evidence as taken from a stipulation of facts reveals that Marblehead (the town) adopted § 108L on March 8, 1971.3 The plaintiff thereafter on April 7, 1971, was appointed a regular full time police officer, effective April 14, 1971. He had been awarded a degree of Bachelor of Science in Accounting from Bentley College on June 7, 1969. The plaintiff’s academic records were forwarded to the State board of higher [622]*622education, the State agency charged under the act with certifying State reimbursements to towns and cities. The board, in accordance with its existing practice, found that the plaintiff was eligible for an incentive pay increase in the amount of twenty per cent and notified the town by letter to that effect. The town refused to pay the increased salary. The plaintiff then brought a petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the proper town authorities including the chief of police, the board of selectmen and the town accountant to pay him the monies allegedly due him under § 108L. The Superior Court judge ruled that the plaintiff was eligible for the disputed pay raises and ordered that the writ issue. The town appealed to the Appeals Court which in a rescript opinion reversed. Palmer v. Selectmen of Marblehead, 2 Mass. App. Ct. 832 (1974). We granted the plaintiff’s application for further appellate review.

After this case was argued before the full court, St. 1975, c. 452, was enacted, and approved on July 11, 1975. That act, in substance, and in pertinent part, amended G. L. c. 41, § 108L, by providing that all points to be awarded for semester credits and degrees shall be credited “notwithstanding the date of appointment” of the officer.4

The court thereafter informed the parties and amici that, arguably, the amendment of the statute resolved the issues of this case, and that a full opinion by the court might be redundant. The parties and amici were permitted to file memoranda with the court as to these propositions. The Attorney General urged that a full opinion could be useful to “settle the policy of this statute and obviate further litigation.” The town, on the other hand, urged the publishing of a full opinion on the [623]*623ground that the town, although it accepted § 108L, has never accepted St. 1975, c. 452. Indeed, the town now contends that § 108L is no longer applicable to this case or effective in the town, by reason of the amendment. Cf. Brucato v. Lawrence, 338 Mass. 612, 616 (1959); Dudley v. Cambridge, 347 Mass. 543, 545-546 (1964). The town further points out that the 1975 amendment has no effect on its argument addressed to the words “in the field of police work” as they appear in § 108L.

We hold that the trial judge was correct in his ruling that the plaintiff was eligible for the disputed pay raise. We reach this conclusion based on our construction of § 108L without regard to the provisions of St. 1975, c. 452. Essentially, we are thus concluding that the effect of the amending statute was nugatory, in so far as it applies to this case. The circumstance that the Legislature chose in 1975 to amend the statute to establish rights “notwithstanding the date of appointment” does not, to say the least, affect our conclusion that the Legislature intended the same result to flow from the original enactment of § 108L.

Accordingly, we need not and do not reach the issues now intimated by the town as arising from the 1975 amendment. We proceed to a discussion of the issues as originally argued before us, in light of § 108L and without regard to the amendment, including a consideration of the effect of the statutory words “in the field of police work.”

1. The parties and the amici curiae5 discuss at length one of the issues in terms of whether § 108L is to be given retroactive effect. They cite the well established principle that a statute conferring substantive rights, as opposed to one defining procedural practice, is not to have retroactive application unless the Legislature clearly [624]*624so intended. See, e.g., Hanscom v. Malden & Melrose Gas Light Co. 220 Mass. 1, 3 (1914); Foley v. Springfield, 328 Mass. 59, 61 (1951); Ricker v. Northeastern Univ. 361 Mass. 169 (1972); McCarthy v. Sheriff of Suffolk County, 366 Mass. 779 (1975). See also Brucato v. Lawrence, 338 Mass. 612, 617 (1959). However, the sense in which “retroactivity” is an issue in this case must be clarified somewhat, for, as we said in McCarthy v. Sheriff of Suffolk County, supra, at 327, “The fact that a nonprocedural statute applies to the plaintiffs does not, in and of itself, make that statute retroactive.” Cf. Brucato v. Lawrence, supra.

When the town adopted § 108L on March 8, 1971, it is clear that substantive rights in the police officers and correlative duties in the town were created; before that date a police officer in the town had no right to incentive pay and the town had no duty to pay such incentive pay. Hart and Sacks, The Legal Process, 141-145 (Tent. ed. 1959). However, neither the plaintiff, nor any other police officer, is making any claim for incentive pay alleged to have accrued prior to the effective date of § 108L when those rights were created. Thus, we are not asked to read § 108L as creating substantive rights retroactively.

Rather, the issue is whether § 108L may be deemed to have effect when the condition of earned credits exists as a condition prior to appointment to the police force or town acceptance of the act. To construe the requirements of § 108L as being satisfied by prior events does not result in retroactivity. “Neither does the fact that ... [a statute] draws on antecedent facts for its operation.” McCarthy v. Sheriff of Suffolk County, supra. Cf. Cox v. Hart, 260 U. S. 427, 435 (1922); Lewis v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. 292 U. S. 559, 571 (1934).

Nevertheless, the question remains whether the Legislature intended that § 108L be triggered by prior conditions and that inquiry in turn depends on the statutory [625]*625language and the purposes underlying the statute. Hart and Sacks, op. cit. at 1410-1417.

With respect to statutory language, the decision of the Appeals Court in this case denying the plaintiff relief is hinged on the phrase “furthering their education” which appears in the first paragraph of the statute. See n. 1. The Appeals Court read that phrase as necessarily implying “obtaining education additional to that which one already has, and therefore a full-time police officer must, in order to ‘further his education within the meaning of § 108L, obtain education additional to that which he had when he became a full-time police officer.” Palmer v. Selectmen of Marblehead, 2 Mass. App. Ct. 832 (1974).

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

Related

Palmer v. BOARD OF SELECTMEN OF MARBLEHEAD
335 N.E.2d 349 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
335 N.E.2d 349, 368 Mass. 620, 1975 Mass. LEXIS 1027, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/palmer-v-board-of-selectmen-mass-1975.