Opinion

Watrel v. Com., Dept. of Educ.

  • 513 Pa. 61
  • 518 A.2d 1158
  • 1986 Pa. LEXIS 964
Court
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
Dec 11, 1986
Status
Published
Author
Hutchinson
On the bench
Nix, Larsen, Flaherty, McDermott, Papadakos, Hutchinson
Cited by
17 cases

holding that an agreement between an employer and employee cannot extend or alter what the employee is legally entitled to receive under the Retirement Code

How later courts described this case

  • holding that an agreement between an employer and employee cannot extend or alter what the employee is legally entitled to receive under the Retirement Code
  • State Employees’ Retirement Board not obligated to accept contributions on behalf of a member where contributions were made in accordance with a settlement agreement to which Board was not a party

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

HUTCHINSON, Justice,

concurring.

I concur in the result.

Considering the opportunities appellant has had and may still have to vest his pension in a proper manner, I must agree with Mr. Justice Larsen. Appellant has not demonstrated the kind of inequity which should induce us to relieve him from the effects of his reliance upon what appears to be his counsel’s mistake in applying a complex statute to the situation in which appellant found himself when the settlement agreement was negotiated.

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.