Court Upholds Reemployment Offset in Duty-Disability Case

A Ramsey County District Court judge has upheld 2023 legislative changes to duty-disability benefits for first responders, ruling that the offsets and application procedures can be reasonably modified by lawmakers.

On Oct. 4, 2025, Judge Edward Schue granted summary judgment (a court-ordered judgment without a trial) in favor of the Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) in a case challenging 2023 changes to duty-disability benefits.

Background

In 2023, the Minnesota Legislature amended the laws governing duty-disability benefits for first responders covered by the PERA Police and Fire (P&F) plan. Amendments to three sections of law that govern procedures for duty-disability benefits administered by PERA were at issue.

Amendments to Minnesota Statutes 353.031, subdivisions 4(f) and 8, require applicants to show that their employer does not have a comparable position available and require periodic disability reapplications to be certified by specific medical professionals. The Legislature also changed the benefit offsets and limits in Minnesota Statute 353.65, tying benefit levels more closely to years of service and reemployment income. The goal of these changes was to better align the income of duty-disability recipients with active members and with other comparable plans.

The Minnesota Duty Disabled Association (MDDA), which represents 260 first responders receiving duty-disability benefits, challenged the amendments. MDDA argued the changes impaired members’ contractual rights and violated due process by reducing benefit amounts they believed were promised. They also claimed duty-disability benefits vest when a first responder becomes duty disabled and cannot be altered during the duration of the disability.

Court decisions

The lawsuit was originally filed in 2023 to block the changes from going into effect. Initially, Ramsey County District Court granted a temporary injunction preventing PERA from enforcing the new reemployment offset provision. PERA appealed, arguing that MDDA had not shown irreparable harm. The Minnesota Court of Appeals agreed, finding a temporary injunction was not warranted because monetary damages could provide a remedy if the plaintiffs ultimately prevailed. The Minnesota Supreme Court declined MDDA’s petition for further review, sending the case back to Ramsey County District Court to consider the merits of the case.

After reviewing all the evidence, the district court judge upheld the 2023 laws as amended. The judge found that while MDDA members relied on existing duty-disability benefits, the benefits do not vest, and both benefit levels and eligibility procedures are subject to reasonable legislative action.

The court noted there was no evidence of a clear or definite promise that offsets or application procedures would never change, and the 2023 amendments did not completely eliminate duty-disability benefits. The ruling also said the changes resulted from a deliberative legislative process and were supported by rational goals, including parity, and the long-term fiscal stability of the P&F plan funds.

PERA will continue administering the duty-disability benefit offset and reapplication requirements as outlined in current law. More information on duty-disability benefits and reemployment offsets is available on PERA’s website.

Read more news articles.