False claim - work-related injury
Egan v Von Essen, 260 AD2d 479
New York City firefighter Richard M. Egan claimed he injured himself by falling out of a chair while at work. On May 10, 1994, Egan filed an application for a service-incurred disability pension with the Fire Department Pension Fund based on back injuries he allegedly suffered by the fall.
In the course of disciplinary action taken against Egan, the administrative law judge [ALJ] found that Egan had injured his back while participating in a nonwork-related jujitsu class. In addition, the ALJ decided that Egan violated certain regulations of the Fire Department as well as his oath of office by filing an official report containing statements concerning the incident that he knew were untrue.
Based on the findings and recommendation of the ALJ, the Fire Commissioner fired Egan. Egan challenged the Commissioner’s decision, contending that it was not supported by substantial evidence. He also contended that even assuming that he was guilty of the charges filed against him, the penalty of dismissal was unduly harsh.
The Appellate Division rejected Egan’s appeal. It said that under the circumstances of this case, it found that the charges were supported by substantial evidence, including Egan’s “admission of wrongdoing to several witnesses.”
As to the penalty imposed by the commissioner, the court said that “contrary to [Egan’s] contention, the penalty of dismissal was not ‘shocking to one’s sense of fairness’, in view of the evidence that he violated Fire Department regulations and engaged in acts of dishonesty,” citing Pell v Board of Education, 34 NY2d 222.
Similarly, in Miller v NYC Department of Corrections, 260 AD2d 190, the Appellate Division, 1st Department, affirmed the dismissal of New York City correction officer Marie Miller based on the correction commissioner’s finding that Miller made “false and misleading statements during investigatory interviews,” and, accordingly, is guilty of conduct unbecoming a correction officer.
NYPPL
Summaries of, and commentaries on, selected court and administrative decisions and related matters affecting public employers and employees in New York State in particular and in other jurisdictions in general.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS NOT USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN THE SUMMARIES OF JUDICIAL AND QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS PREPARED BY NYPPL
CAUTION
Subsequent court and administrative rulings, or changes to laws, rules and regulations may have modified or clarified or vacated or reversed the decisions summarized here. Accordingly, these summaries should be Shepardized® or otherwise checked to make certain that the most recent information is being considered by the reader.
THE MATERIAL ON THIS WEBSITE IS FOR INFORMATION ONLY. AGAIN, CHANGES IN LAWS, RULES, REGULATIONS AND NEW COURT AND ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS MAY AFFECT THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS LAWBLOG. THE MATERIAL PRESENTED IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE AND THE USE OF ANY MATERIAL POSTED ON THIS WEBSITE, OR CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING SUCH MATERIAL, DOES NOT CREATE AN ATTORNEY-CLIENT RELATIONSHIP.
New York Public Personnel Law Blog Editor Harvey Randall served as Principal Attorney, New York State Department of Civil Service; Director of Personnel, SUNY Central Administration; Director of Research, Governor’s Office of Employee Relations; and Staff Judge Advocate General, New York Guard.
Consistent with the Declaration of Principles jointly adopted by a Committee of the American Bar Association and a Committee of Publishers and Associations, the material posted to this blog is presented with the understanding that neither the publisher nor NYPPL and, or, its staff and contributors are providing legal advice to the reader and in the event legal or other expert assistance is needed, the reader is urged to seek such advice from a knowledgeable professional.
Copyright 2009-2024 - Public Employment Law Press.
Email: nyppl@nycap.rr.com.