Skip to main content

State ex rel. Tarrier v. Pub. Emps. Retirement Bd. (Slip Opinion)

OhioMarch 10, 2021No. 2020-0454Cited 2 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Per Curiam
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' denial of a writ of mandamus, holding that the public employee failed to establish a clear legal right to transfer from the combined retirement plan to the traditional plan or a clear legal duty on the retirement board to grant such transfer.

Excerpt

Mandamus—Writ sought by public employee ordering retirement board to transfer her from one type of retirement plan to different type of plan—No provision in R.C. Chapter 145 establishes clear legal right for public employee to obtain relief sought or imposes clear legal duty on retirement board to grant it—Court of appeals' denial of writ affirmed.

What This Ruling Means

# Court Rules Against Employee's Retirement Plan Transfer Request A public employee in Ohio asked a court to force the Public Employees Retirement Board to let her switch from one retirement plan to a different one. The employee believed she had the right to make this change, so she filed a legal request asking the court to order the retirement board to allow the transfer. The Ohio Supreme Court disagreed and sided with the retirement board. The court found that Ohio's retirement law does not give employees an automatic right to switch between retirement plans, nor does it require the retirement board to approve such transfers. **Why This Matters:** This ruling clarifies that public employees cannot simply demand to change their retirement plan type through the courts. Workers enrolled in a particular retirement plan should understand that switching plans isn't guaranteed, even if they believe a different plan would benefit them. Employees considering retirement options should review their plan documents carefully and work directly with their retirement board rather than expecting courts to override plan rules.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.