Kaser v. PERS

For the purposes of ORS 238.440, the term “determine” does not necessarily entail a robust investigation. Rather, “determine” is better understood to denote decision-making in which investigation may be incidental but does not play a primary role.

After Petitioner retired, the Public Employee Retirement System (PERS) adjusted her creditable service based on information provided by her former employer that showed she was not entitled to creditable service during several leaves of absence petitioner took before retirement.
Petitioner appealed PERS’s determination regarding petitioner’s creditable service for purposes of her retirement. PERS contended that ORS 238.450 “does not authorize PERS to resolve substantive disputes between employers and employees and that PERS lack[ed] authority to alter employer-provided information.” Under ORS 238.450(4), PERS shall “determine the accuracy of the disputed information” provided to it by petitioner’s employer. For the purposes of ORS 238.440, the term “determine” does not necessarily entail a robust investigation. Rather, “determine” is better understood to denote decision-making in which investigation may be incidental but does not play a primary role. After interpreting the meaning of the term “determine” as used in the statute, the court explained that, “‘determine’ is better understood, as PERS’s interpretation suggests, to denote decision-making, in which investigation may be incidental but does not play a primary role.” Therefore, the Court found that “the trial court did not err in concluding that PERS complied with the requirement in ORS 238.450(4) to ‘determine the accuracy of the disputed information’ provided to PERS by petitioner’s employer.” Affirmed.