(a) There shall be a retirement system which shall constitute a body corporate and shall be under the management of the Board of Control for the purpose of providing retirement allowances and other benefits under the provisions of this chapter for teachers of the State of Alabama. The retirement system shall be established as of October 1, 1940, or as soon thereafter as the Governor by proclamation declares the funds accruing to the Teachers’ Retirement System of Alabama are sufficient to meet the obligations of the “normal contribution” on October 1, of a year following 1940. It shall have the power and privileges of a corporation and shall be known as the “Teachers’ Retirement System of Alabama,” and by such name all of its business shall be transacted, all of its funds invested and all of its cash and securities and other property held in trust for the purpose for which received.
(b) Any provisions of law to the contrary notwithstanding, the Boards of Control of the Teachers’ Retirement System of Alabama and the Employees’ Retirement System of Alabama shall have vested in them all powers necessary to fulfill their fiduciary duty as trustees to members of each respective system including the power to sue and be sued, complain and defend in their own names; provided, however, that as instrumentalities of the state funded by the state, the retirement systems, their officers, and employees shall be immune from suit to the same extent as the state, its agencies, officers, and employees.
(Acts 1939, No. 419, p. 559, § 2; Code 1940, T. 52, §363; Code 1975, §36-27B-6; Acts 1983, No. 83-616, p. 953, §§6, 7; Acts 1984, No. 84-259, p. 431, §1.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
8
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1980–2023 · leading case:
Denson v. Bronner, 171 So. 3d 614 (Ala. 2014).
Denson v. Bronner, 171 So. 3d 614 (Ala. 2014).
· cites it 4× “See Ala.Code 1975, § 16-25-2(b) and § 36-27-2(b).”
Knutson v. Bronner, 721 So. 2d 678 (Ala. 1998).
· cites it 3× “State employees have vested property rights created by § 16-25-2 and § 36-27-2, Ala. Code 1975, and the state cannot constitutionally impair or diminish those property rights.”
In Re Tibbs, 242 B.R. 511 (Bankr. N.D. Ala. 1999).
· cites it 2× “Ala.Code § 16-25-2 (1995). 22 . No evidence was presented to the Court to contradict the Debtor’s testimony and a plain reading of the Alabama statute.”
Thomas S. Burrell v. Teacher's Ret. Sys., 353 F. App'x 182 (11th Cir. 2009).
“2002) (noting that issues not briefed on appeal by pro se litigants are deemed abandoned on appeal). Regardless, the district court did not err in dismissing his federal claims based on Eleventh Amendment immunity because TRSA is an instrumentality of the state as provided by…”
Wood v. State, 261 So. 3d 322 (Ala. 2017).
· cites it 2× “1901; Ala. Code 1975, §§ 16-25-2(b) and 36-27-2(b) (recognizing that the boards of control of the [Teachers' Retirement System] and the [Employees' Retirement System] are instrumentalities of the State, that the [Teachers' Retirement System] and the [Employees' Retirement…”
Coke v. Ret. Sys. of Alabama (N.D. Ala. 2023).
· cites it 6× “See Ala. Code § 16-25-2 (b) (“[A]s instrumentalities of the state funded by the state, the retirement systems, their officers, and employees shall be immune from suit to the same extent as the state, its agencies, officers and employees.”
Wood v. State, 261 So. 3d 322 (Ala. 2017).
· cites it 2× “1901; Ala. Code 1975, §§ 16-25-2(b) and 36-27-2(b) (recognizing that the boards of control of the [Teachers' Retirement System] and the [Employees' Retirement System] are instrumentalities of the State, that the [Teachers' Retirement System] and the [Employees' Retirement…”
Alabama State Fed'n of Teachers v. James, 490 F. Supp. 152 (M.D. Ala. 1980).
· cites it 2× “See, Code of Alabama, § 16-25-2 [1975]. Participants and the State both contribute to the Teachers’ Retirement System.”
— Ala. Code § 16-25-2(b) — 5 cases
Denson v. Bronner, 171 So. 3d 614 (Ala. 2014).
“See Ala.Code 1975, § 16-25-2(b) and § 36-27-2(b).”
Thomas S. Burrell v. Teacher's Ret. Sys., 353 F. App'x 182 (11th Cir. 2009).
“2002) (noting that issues not briefed on appeal by pro se litigants are deemed abandoned on appeal). Regardless, the district court did not err in dismissing his federal claims based on Eleventh Amendment immunity because TRSA is an instrumentality of the state as provided by…”
Wood v. State, 261 So. 3d 322 (Ala. 2017).
“1901; Ala. Code 1975, §§ 16-25-2(b) and 36-27-2(b) (recognizing that the boards of control of the [Teachers' Retirement System] and the [Employees' Retirement System] are instrumentalities of the State, that the [Teachers' Retirement System] and the [Employees' Retirement…”
Coke v. Ret. Sys. of Alabama (N.D. Ala. 2023).
“See Ala. Code § 16-25-2 (b) (“[A]s instrumentalities of the state funded by the state, the retirement systems, their officers, and employees shall be immune from suit to the same extent as the state, its agencies, officers and employees.”
Wood v. State, 261 So. 3d 322 (Ala. 2017).
“1901; Ala. Code 1975, §§ 16-25-2(b) and 36-27-2(b) (recognizing that the boards of control of the [Teachers' Retirement System] and the [Employees' Retirement System] are instrumentalities of the State, that the [Teachers' Retirement System] and the [Employees' Retirement…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.