Duso v. Groton

Summary

The court held that a pension agreement promising retired officers the same nature and scope of health-insurance coverages and deductibles as active officers did not require the town to make equivalent HSA contributions for retirees. It reasoned that an HSA contribution is an optional funding mechanism outside the insurance policy and does not alter the deductible or the insured risks. The court therefore reversed and directed judgment for the town, without reaching the separate challenge to the damages calculation. D’Auria, J., dissenting, would have treated the agreement as ambiguous and affirmed the judgment requiring equivalent HSA contributions.