4
a statute in the nature of a workmen's compensation act--the
Warwick Code. Prior to trial respondent conceded that the
Warwick Code meets the requirements of section 104 and contended
that petitioner's pension payments were made pursuant to the
collective bargaining agreement. Respondent maintained this
position in his pretrial memorandum and during a pretrial
conference call with petitioner and the Court. When questioned
by the Court at trial, however, respondent's counsel was unable
to support his contention. On brief respondent's attempt to
support this contention was equally unconvincing.
The Warwick Code, not the collective bargaining agreement,
authorized petitioner's pension. Cf. Fotis v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1989-287 (finding that payments to a disabled police
officer were made pursuant to municipal law, not a collective
bargaining agreement). Contrary to respondent's contention, the
portion of the collective bargaining agreement that states
"[firefighters] shall be entitled to all of the benefits of the
ordinances of the City of Warwick," merely preserves
firefighters' rights under all the city's ordinances. It does
not authorize a service-connected disability pension. Thus, we
conclude that petitioner's pension payments were made pursuant to
the Warwick Code, not the collective bargaining agreement.
On brief respondent, for the first time, attempts to narrow
the concession by asserting that the statute, standing alone,
meets the requirements of section 104 but that the Court should
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011