The Pennsylvania Supreme Court reversed the Commonwealth Court’s order that declared money received in a settlement from an age-discrimination suit should not be included in that employee’s retirement benefit calculation. The Supreme Court ruled that the lower court disregarded the Retirement Code’s statutory definition of “compensation” and instead deferred to the intent of the settling parties to treat the payment as retirement-covered compensation. The issue arose after a school principal settled his age-discrimination lawsuit with the school that employed him. As part of the settlement, he received $15,000 to retire immediately. The settlement agreement explicitly stated that the $15,000 was additional income for the principal. That mattered because the principal wanted the $15,000 added onto his annual salary for pension-calculation reasons. The PSERB disagreed and did not consider the income salary and therefore excluded it from pension calculations. The Commonwealth Court reversed, finding the language in the actual settlement determinative. The Supreme Court reversed based on its interpretation of the Retirement Code.