James v. State ex rel. Teachers' Retirement System
James v. State ex rel. Teachers' Retirement System
Opinion of the Court
This is an appeal of a judgment of the District Court sustaining the Teachers’ Retirement System of Louisiana and the Board of Directors of the Teachers’ Retirement System of Louisiana’s, defendant-ap-pellees, peremptory exception of no cause of action.
This action was brought by Faye James, Celeste Partain, Judy Conaway, Eloise Bridgman, Charles Heslin and Lee Roy Ou-bre, plaintiff-appellants, to obtain a declaratory judgment and other appropriate relief. In their petition, the appellants alleged: that prior to 1971, they were em
The appellees, in their peremptory exception, contended that the appellants’ petition stated no cause of action because under the act which merged the retirement systems, Act 3 of 1971, the only service credits to be credited to members of the Orleans Parish Teachers’ Retirement System were those credited on or before the date of the merger and that the Teachers’ Retirement System of Louisiana was not bound by any rule, policy or procedure, that may have been adopted by the Orleans Parish Teachers’ Retirement System as to the granting of free service credits to persons who had served in a temporary capacity.
Act 3 of 1971, provides.in part that: “The Board of Directors of the State Teachers’ Retirement System shall be the successor in every way to the Orleans Parish Teachers’ Retirement System . ” (Emphasis added).
The exception of no cause of action concedes, for the purpose of the trial of the exception, the correctness of the facts pleaded. Louisiana State Board of Medical Exam. v. England, 252 La. 1000, 215 So.2d 640 (1968). The appellants in their petition have alleged arbitrary and unjust actions, discrimination in the granting of free service credits, by the Orleans Parish Teachers’ Retirement System and its successor, the Teachers’ Retirement System of Louisiana. “In considering a petition against which an exception of no cause of action has been raised, every reasonable interpretation must be accorded its language in favor of maintaining the sufficiency of the petition and affording the litigant an opportunity to present his evidence.” Hero Lands Company v. Texaco, Inc., La., 310 So.2d 93, 96 (1975). The allegations contained in the appellants’ petition state a cause of action against the appellees.
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the District Court sustaining the appel-lees’ exception of no cause of action is reversed and the case is remanded to the District Court for further proceedings.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Faye JAMES v. STATE of Louisiana, Through TEACHERS' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF LOUISIANA
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published