In re Wargo
In re Wargo
Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Claimants, Albert R. Agostine, Paul R. Burns and Jerome Rose
There is no question that the court reporters, during their “county” tenure, were to receive State pension benefits. N.J.S.A. 2A:11-16i (as it read under the 1948 Act, before the 1967 amendment); Board of Trustees, etc. v. Bd. of Freeholders of Warren Co., 87 N.J.Super. 187 (Law Div. 1965), aff’d 47 N.J. 132 (1966). While we have been informed that the reimbursement for unused sick time is not paid as a pension benefit,
Both before and after the 1967 amendment to N.J.S.A. 2A:11-16, Official Court Reporters were “deemed to be state employees eligible for membership in the state employees’
In N.J.S.A. 2A:11-16(g), the 1948 Act further provided that at least one-third of each reporter’s salary was to be refunded to each county treasurer by the State Treasurer. As time went on, the State reimbursement of court reporters’ salaries greatly exceeded the one-third share, as the statute then provided that the State Treasurer was to refund to the county
such amount as shall be needed to insure that the net costs of court reporters to such county, under this article, for any year beginning July 1st and ending on the following July 30th, shall not exceed the net cost to such county for court reporters for the year beginning July 1, 1947, and ending June 30, 1948.
Since we can take notice of both the increase in cost of living (and the consequent increase in reporters’ pay) and the increase of judicial business between the 1947-1948 court year and the 1962 through 1967 court years, which are the subject of this appeal, the State apparently was responsible for the major share of court reporting expenses during claimants’ initial years of service. Certainly any additional costs for substitute court reporters needed to fill in for plaintiffs when they were sick would have fallen within the State-reimbursed expense. Thus when the reporters did not use their alloted sick time, the State, not the counties, was the entity that benefited.
We conclude therefore that during the period in question an Official Court Reporter was a State employee, under a State pension system and subject to the direction of the State courts. In fact, the burden of paying a substantial portion of the reporters’ salary fell on the State. The counties were merely remitting agents. Under these circumstances it would be incongruous to hold the State free from responsibility to pay for unused sick time.
The decision of the Department of Personnel is reversed, and the matter is remanded to the Department with a direction to credit the unused “county” sick time to claimants’ State service
Two other claimants who had served as judicial secretaries advanced claims which were similarly denied. They have not, however, appealed that determination.
N.J.S.A, 11A:6-16 reads:
*286 State employees in the career service, and those in the senior executive and unclassified services who have been granted sick leave under terms and conditions similar to career service employees, shall be entitled upon retirement from a State-administered retirement system to receive a lump sum payment as supplemental compensation for each full day of accumulated sick leave which is credited on the effective date of retirement.
Administrative regulations govern the amount of payment. See N.J.A.C. 4:5-1.1 et seq. and 4:2-26.2 and .9 now recodified as N.J.A.C. 4A:6-1.3, 3.1 and 3.3.
The Attorney General has supplied this court with a copy of L.1988, c. 47, account 9430-100-05660-50, allocating such payments to “salary and other benefits.”
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.