- 13 -
H. The Trial
On April 26, 1995, the present case was called for trial in
Baltimore, Maryland. At that time the Court filed the parties'
stipulation of facts, which included some 16 exhibits. The Court
also filed the parties' trial memoranda. Petitioners' trial
memorandum estimated trial time at 6 hours and stated that
petitioners expected to call 3 witnesses, including a
representative of the Maryland State Retirement Agency.
As it turned out, the trial of this case lasted less than 2
hours, and the only witness who was called to testify was
petitioner, who was examined and cross-examined.
A principal thrust, if not the principal thrust, of
petitioners' presentation at trial (and on brief) was that the
Transfer Refund was not made pursuant to Maryland State law
(because the Transfer Refund would have been invalid if made
pursuant to Maryland State law), but rather was made pursuant to
an administrative policy of the Maryland State Retirement Agency,
which administrative policy required petitioner to retire in
order to receive the Transfer Refund.9
9 Thus, on brief, petitioners argued as follows:
Petitioner's election to receive a [Transfer
Refund] was an election made pursuant to the retirement
policy legally established by the Board and was not
made pursuant to the statutory transfer option in [Md.
Ann. Code, art. 73B] Section 83(8). In order to elect
the retirement option as established by the Board's
policy it was necessary for Petitioner Glenn L.
(continued...)
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011