Opinion

State Ex Rel. Wrocklage v. Board of Chosen Freeholders

  • 134 N.J.L. 373
  • 48 A.2d 390
  • 1946 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 121
Court
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Filed
Jul 25, 1946
Status
Published
Author
Colie
On the bench
Donges, Heher, Colie
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Colie, J.

This matter is before the court on the return of a rule to show cause directed to the respondents why the rela

*374

tor should not be retired on half pay. The facts are stipulated as follows: George W. Wroeklage is sixty-three years of age and has served as a county probation officer for sixteen years. In October, 1944, he suffered a paralytic stroke which permanently incapacitated him from further duty. He was granted a leave of absence in an attempt to regain his health but the attempt was unsuccessful. In June, 1945, he filed a petition for retirement. The Court of Common Pleas designated three physicians who found and certified him to be “permanently incapacitated for further duty.” Upon the filing of the aforesaid certificate, the county treasurer and the Board of Freeholders of Bergen County determined that relator was “not eligible for retirement or a pension at this time due to the fact that the reports of the examining physicians do not find that the petitioner’s physical condition is directly related to the services which were performed by your petitioner as a Probation Officer.”

It should be particularly noted that the sole ground upon which the petition for pension was denied was the lack of a finding by the examining physicians that “petitioner’s physical condition is directly related to the services which were performed * * * as a Probation Officer.” Turning to

R. 8.

43:10-51 we find that the examining physicians are limited to a finding of whether or not there is permanent incapacity for further duty. There is not one word in the section of the statute prescribing the duties of the examining physicians as to the necessity for a finding that the disability is either directly or indirectly related to the services performed as a probation officer. Since the stipulation of facts confines itself to the single reason above stated, we specifically confine our decision thereto.

A writ of

mandamus

is allowed, with costs, in accordance with the application therefor.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.