On July 9, 2010, a retired NYPD officer, represented by the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, filed this class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The plaintiff sued the City of New York, the New York City Police Department, and the New York City Police Pension Fund under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA). The plaintiff sought declaratory, injunctive, and monetary relief as well as attorneys’ fees and costs. According to the plaintiff, in computing the plaintiff’s pensionable earnings, the defendants failed to rely on the plaintiff’s average rate of compensation and failed to take into account the compensation the plaintiff would have received but for his periods of military service. The plaintiff claimed that as a result of the computational errors that were in violation of USERRA, the plaintiff suffered a loss of pension benefits in an amount to be determined at trial. The case was assigned to Judge Richard J. Sullivan and Magistrate Judge Henry B. Pitman.

On October 8, 2010, the defendants moved to dismiss the complaint in its entirety on the ground that the complaint failed to state a claim because USERRA does not require defendants to include overtime and night shift differential pay that plaintiff did not earn due to military service in calculating plaintiff’s pension. Disagreeing with the plaintiffs, Judge Sullivan denied this motion. 2011 WL 4469513.

In their answer to the complaint, the defendants made a counterclaim, alleging that the plaintiff had failed to make reimbursement payments owed to the City of New York in the amount of $78,481.80. On December 16, 2011, the plaintiff moved to dismiss this counterclaim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and alternatively, for failure to state a claim. Agreeing with the plaintiff’s jurisdictional argument, the court dismissed the defendants’ counterclaim on February 22, 2012.

On June 15, 2012, the defendants filed a motion for leave to file an interlocutory appeal of the court’s dismissal of the defendant’s counterclaims. Then, on July 30, 2012, the court denied the defendants’ motion for leave to appeal for reasons that are unavailable on the docket. That same day, the plaintiffs filed their amended complaint, adding class allegations and two additional plaintiffs who were also retired NYPD officers.

On June 17, 2013, the plaintiffs moved the court to preliminarily approve the settlement agreement and to certify class for the purposes of settlement. On July 2, 2013, the court approved this motion and retained jurisdiction over the matter to ensure compliance.

The settlement agreement provided substantial relief for then-current NYPD officers who were members of the Police Pension Fund, NYPD service member retirees who were receiving pensions from the Police Pension Fund, and current City employees belonging to other City retirement systems. Active officers were entitled to significant injunctive relief, while retirees were entitled to both injunctive relief and full monetary relief. Additionally, the agreement required the defendants to recalculate the pensionable earnings of NYPD actives, publish the agreement so that it might be readily available to its active and retired employees, and train the defendant’s employees responsible for performing the calculations. Finally, and importantly, the City of New York had agreed to take steps to ensure that all of the principles outlined in the agreement would apply to other City of New York employees, both active and retired. Specifically, the City would request that other city retirement systems implement the principles of the agreement with respect to their members.

On December 30, 2013, the plaintiffs moved for final approval of the settlement agreement, which the court granted on January 14, 2014. Over the next two years, the parties moved for extensions of time to comply with the settlement agreement. The docket was last updated on April 13, 2016 with a compliance deadline of June 29, 2016. The case is presumably closed.

Jake Parker - 06/20/2018


compress summary