Title: Mondt v. Cheyenne Police Pension Bd.

State: wyoming

Issuer: Wyoming Supreme Court

Document:

Mondt v. Cheyenne Police Pension Bd.1999 WY 122986 P.2d 858Case Number: 97-291Decided: 09/01/1999Supreme Court of Wyoming
 
LINDA D. MONDT, Appellant (Petitioner),

v.

CHEYENNE POLICE PENSION 
BOARD, Appellee (Respondent).

 

W.R.A.P. 12.09(b) 
Certification from the District Court of Laramie County, The Honorable Edward L. 
Grant, Judge.

Mitchell E. 
Osborn of Grant & Osborn, Cheyenne, WY. Argument by Mr. Osborn, 
representing appellant.

Mary B. Guthrie, 
Cheyenne City Attorney. Argument by Ms. Guthrie, representing 
appellee.

Before 
LEHMAN, C.J., and MACY, GOLDEN, and TAYLOR,* JJ., and PRICE, 
D.J.

* Chief Justice at time of 
oral argument; retired November 2, 1998.

PRICE, District 
Judge.

[¶1]      This appeal 
raises the issue of statutory interpretation of the type of disability required 
to permit a person to retire under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 15-5-308(a) (Lexis 1999). 
The Cheyenne Police Pension Board, after hearing, determined that the appellant 
did not qualify for any pension under this statute. The appellant filed her 
Petition for Judicial Review of Administrative Action Pursuant to W.R.A.P. Rule 
12. A Joint Motion for Order of Certification of Questions to Supreme Court 
Pursuant to W.R.A.P. Rule 12.09 resulted in Stipulated Questions for 
Certification to Supreme Court Pursuant to W.R.A.P. Rule 12.09 and an order from 
Judge Grant certifying those questions to this court. 

ISSUES

[¶2]      The certified 
questions are:

1. Is petitioner 
Linda Mondt disabled and entitled to a disability pension under [Wyo. Stat. Ann. 
§] 15-5-308(a)?

2. Does a 
pre-existing condition which was exacerbated by police work and which ultimately 
becomes a disabling mental illness ten years after employment, disqualify an 
officer for a disability pension under [Wyo. Stat. Ann. §] 
15-5-308(a)?

3. Does [Wyo. 
Stat. Ann. §] 15-5-308(a) require that an "off-duty" disability be caused by a 
"bodily injury" in order to qualify for the 50% disability 
pension?

4. Does [Wyo. 
Stat. Ann. §] 15-5-308(a) allow for an "off-duty" disability pension for a 
certified "mental disability?"

FACTS

[¶3]      Linda Mondt was 
employed as a Cheyenne police officer for approximately eleven years. She was 
suspended without pay and without an opportunity for a hearing on the 
suspension. That decision was appealed by her to this court. Mondt v. Cheyenne 
Police Dep't, 924 P.2d 70 (Wyo. 1996). Subsequent to the decision in that case, 
Police Chief John Powell became concerned about psychological problems 
experienced by Ms. Mondt that interfered with her performance as a police 
officer. Chief Powell requested that Ms. Mondt be evaluated by Dr. Jack 
Digliani, a licensed clinical police psychologist from Fort Collins, Colorado. 
Dr. Digliani submitted two reports dated February 21, 1997, and March 20, 1997. 
The second report was in response to specific questions submitted by the pension 
board secretary. The first report indicated that Ms. Mondt suffered from a 
chronic major depressive disorder which was organically based. The stressors in 
her employment as a police officer had exacerbated her condition. She "is not 
likely to achieve any significant symptom remission as long as she continues to 
work in any capacity in a law enforcement environment." The opinion of Dr. 
Digliani was that:

Officer Mondt is 
occupationally disabled and not fit to resume police duties. The probability of 
any future remission of her condition is significantly diminished by the 
stressors of police work. I recommend that Office Mondt retire from the Cheyenne 
Police Department due to this disability.

The second 
report from the doctor concluded that:

Brain 
dysfunction of the nature characterized by Officer Mondt's illness usually has a 
long standing history. In most cases, and certainly in Officer Mondt's case, 
there is a prior history of symptom otology. This history predates her 
employment as a police officer. However, the intensity and seriousness of her 
current condition does not pre-date her police employment.

[¶4]      After her 
examination, Ms. Mondt applied for an on-duty medical retirement. That was 
changed by her to an off-duty retirement under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 15-5-308(a), 
providing a pension of 50 percent of her monthly salary while she was disabled. 
A hearing was held on the application on April 21, 1997. The Board met on May 8, 
1997, and, in Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order dated May 9, 1997, 
denied the application. Appellant filed a petition with the district court for 
review of the Board decision.

DISCUSSION

[¶5]      The application 
for an off-duty pension in this case is provided by the statute. Wyo. Stat. Ann. 
§ 15-5-308(a) provides:

If any person, 
while serving as a policeman is physically disabled as a result of any bodily 
injury received in the immediate or direct performance or discharge of his 
duties, the board, upon his written request filed with the secretary of the 
board, or without the written request if it deems it to be for the benefit of 
the public, shall retire that person from the department and order that he be 
paid from the fund during his lifetime a monthly pension equal to sixty-two and 
one-half percent (622%) of the amount of his regular monthly salary, effective 
at the time of his retirement. If the officer's disability is off-duty related, 
the officer shall receive a monthly pension equal to fifty percent (50%) of his 
monthly salary effective at the time of his retirement. If the disability 
ceases, the pension shall cease, and the person shall be restored to active 
service at the existing salary of his position or rank at the time he is 
reinstated.

[¶6]      In order to 
answer the questions certified, this statute must be 
interpreted.

Under our 
well-established rules of statutory construction, we "endeavor to interpret 
statutes in accordance with the Legislature's intent." Halpern v. Wheeldon, 890 P.2d 562, 564 (Wyo. 1995); State Dep't of Revenue & Taxation v. Pacificorp, 
872 P.2d 1163, 1166 (Wyo. 1994). "`[T]he initial step in arriving at a correct 
interpretation . . . is an inquiry respecting the ordinary and obvious meaning 
of the words employed according to their arrangement and connection.'" Parker 
Land & Cattle Co. v. Game & Fish Comm'n, 845 P.2d 1040, 1042 (Wyo. 1993) 
(quoting Rasmussen v. Baker, 7 Wyo. 117, 133, 50 P. 819, 823 (1897)). "`[W]e 
give effect to every word, clause and sentence and construe all components of a 
statute in pari materia.'" Parker Land & Cattle, at 1042 (quoting City of 
Laramie v. Facer, 814 P.2d 268, 270 (Wyo. 1991)). We must first determine 
whether a statute is clear or ambiguous. A statute is unambiguous if its wording 
is such that reasonable persons are able to agree as to its meaning with 
consistency and predictability. A statute is ambiguous only if it is found to be 
vague or uncertain and subject to varying interpretations. Halpern, at 564-65. 
Whether an ambiguity exists in a statute is a matter of law to be determined by 
the court. Id., at 565; Parker Land & Cattle, at 1043. If the language of 
the statute is plain and unambiguous, we apply its plain meaning and need not 
consult the numerous rules of statutory construction. Houghton v. Franscell, 870 P.2d 1050, 1054 (Wyo. 1994).

Sue Davidson, 
P.C. v. Naranjo, 904 P.2d 354, 355-56 (Wyo. 1995).

[¶7]      The issue before 
the court is whether the statute provides for a pension for both mental and 
physical disability for an off-duty related disability, and only for a physical 
disability if received "in the immediate or direct performance or discharge of 
his duties." The plain language of the first sentence states that if "a 
policeman is physically disabled as a result of any bodily injury received in 
the immediate or direct performance or discharge of his duties," she is entitled 
to a 622 percent disability. (Emphasis added.) The second sentence and the third 
sentence only refer to a "disability." Mondt contends that this includes a 
mental disability. This court disagrees. The subject matter of this section of 
the statute is a physical disability. The first sentence of the section sets the 
stage, and the second and third sentences give further information about this 
physical disability. There is no ambiguity in this statute. The language of the 
statute communicates a plain meaning to this court, and that meaning will be 
applied.

[¶8]      An examination of 
the history of this section is also helpful. Originally passed in 1965, the 
section read:

When any person, 
while serving as policeman is physically disabled as a result of any bodily 
injury received in the immediate or direct performance or discharge of his 
duties the board shall, upon his written request filed with the secretary of the 
board, or without the written request, if it deems it to be for the benefit of 
the public, retire that person from the department and order that he be paid 
from the fund during his lifetime a yearly pension equal to four (4) times the 
amount of his regular monthly salary, effective at the time of his retirement. 
On the death of the pensioner no one claiming under him has any claim against 
the policemen pension fund except for amounts accrued and unpaid at the time of 
his death. When the disability ceases, the pension shall cease, and the person 
shall be restored to active service at the same salary he received at the time 
of his retirement.

1965 Wyo. Sess. 
Laws, ch. 112, § 321.

[¶9]      An amendment in 
1979 added the following to the middle of the section and included some 
irrelevant changes to the beginning and end of the 
section:

If the officer's 
disability is off duty related, the officer shall receive a monthly pension 
equal to fifty percent (50%) of his monthly salary effective at the time of his 
retirement.

1979 Wyo. Sess. 
Laws, ch. 84, § 1. Other amendments made in 1980 and 1991 did not make changes 
significant to this appeal. 1980 Wyo. Sess. Laws, ch. 38, § 1; 1991 Wyo. Sess. 
Laws, ch. 71, § 2.

[¶10]   Looking at the changes made by the 
legislature, this court is more convinced that the section refers only to 
physical disability. The amendments by the legislature were not made to add a 
pension for a mental disability.

CONCLUSION

[¶11]   The answers to the certified 
questions are:

1. Is petitioner 
Linda Mondt disabled and entitled to a disability pension under Wyo. Stat. Ann. 
§ 15-5-308(a)? NO.

2. Does a 
pre-existing condition which was exacerbated by police work and which ultimately 
becomes a disabling mental illness ten years after employment, disqualify an 
officer for a disability pension under Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 15-5-308(a)? 
YES.

3. Does Wyo. 
Stat. Ann. § 15-5-308(a) require that an "off-duty" disability be caused by a 
"bodily injury" in order to qualify for the 50% disability pension? 
YES.

4. Does Wyo. 
Stat. Ann. § 15-5-308(a) allow for an "off-duty" disability pension for a 
certified "mental disability?" NO.