46 N.Y.2d 488 (1979)

Pension benefits adjustments intended to equalize treatment among retirees do not constitute cost-of-living supplements that would bar additional cost-of-living payments under General Municipal Law § 207-i.

Summary

Retired New York City firefighters sought a supplemental retirement allowance based on the consumer price index under General Municipal Law § 207-i, arguing that prior pension adjustments did not preclude this additional benefit. The New York Court of Appeals held that the firefighters were entitled to the supplemental allowance. The court reasoned that the 1973 amendments to the New York City Administrative Code, which increased the minimum pension, were intended to equalize benefits and did not constitute a cost-of-living supplement. Therefore, the firefighters were eligible for the supplemental payments under § 207-i. The court limited retroactive payments due to the retirees’ delay in asserting their claim.

Facts

The petitioners, retired New York City firefighters, had their pensions fixed at three-fourths of their salary at the time of retirement. In 1967, New York State enacted General Municipal Law § 207-i, which provided a cost-of-living escalator for city fire department retirees based on the consumer price index. Local Laws 92 and 93 of 1973 amended the New York City Administrative Code to increase the minimum pension amount for disability retirees, removing a previous restriction against receiving benefits under other laws simultaneously.

Procedural History

The firefighters requested that their pensions be supplemented by cost-of-living payments under § 207-i. The city’s Corporation Counsel issued an opinion that the firefighters could receive either the § 207-i benefits or the amended code benefits, but not both. The firefighters then filed an Article 78 proceeding, demanding payment. Special Term granted the petition, ordering payments from July 1, 1977. The Appellate Division modified this, making payments retroactive to August 1, 1976, the date of demand.

Issue(s)

1. Whether the pension benefits received by the firefighters under the 1973 amendments to the New York City Administrative Code constitute cost-of-living supplements, thereby precluding them from receiving additional cost-of-living payments under General Municipal Law § 207-i.
2. Whether the Appellate Division properly limited retroactive payments to the period after the firefighters’ demand for payment.

Holding

1. No, because the pension adjustments were intended to equalize benefits, not to serve as ongoing cost-of-living supplements.
2. Yes, because the firefighters delayed unreasonably in asserting their claim.

Court’s Reasoning

The Court of Appeals agreed with the lower court’s interpretation of § 207-i, stating that the term