ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE [AI] IS NOT USED, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN PREPARING NYPPL SUMMARIES OF JUDICIAL AND QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS

March 27, 2024

Injury sustained by a police officer participating in a training exercise ruled not an accident for the purpose of eligibility for accidental disability retirement benefits

A police officer [Petitioner] filed an application for accidental disability retirement benefits alleging that he was permanently disabled due to injuries sustained in an incident when he fell while engaged in a training exercise at the police academy. His application was denied on the ground that the incident did not constitute an accident within the meaning of Retirement and Social Security Law §363. Following a hearing for re-determination, a Hearing Officer [HO] denied the application, concluding that the incident occurred during a training program that was an ordinary part of Petitioner's job duties and a normal risk of those duties and, as such, was not an accident for purposes of accidental disability retirement benefits.

The Comptroller sustained the HO's decision, adopting the HO's findings and conclusions of law. Petitioner initiates a CPLR Article 78 proceeding challenging the Comptroller's determination.

Noting that for purposes of the Retirement and Social Security Law an accident is "defined as a sudden, fortuitous mischance, unexpected, out of the ordinary, and injurious in impact", the Appellate Division explained that under settled law, "an incident is not an accident within the meaning of the Retirement and Social Security Law where the underlying injuries result from an expected or foreseeable event arising during the performance of routine employment duties or occur during the course of a training program constituting an ordinary part of the employee's job duties and the normal risks arising therefrom". 

Further, said the Court, the petitioner has the burden to establish that the event producing the injury was accidental in nature, and the Comptroller's determination will be upheld where it is supported by substantial evidence.

Here Petitioner was participating in a "simulated training exercise" that required him to dismount from a moving bicycle and then run on foot to chase an instructor acting as a fleeing "suspect." During the exercise, Petitioner lost his balance and fell on his knee, causing injuries. Further, Petitioner confirmed "the bicycle was not defective and that he did not hit anything while riding the bicycle and did not slip or trip on anything while attempting to dismount."

Noting that "Pursuing and subduing a fleeing suspect is an ordinary employment duty of a police officer", the Appellate Division opined that Petitioner's job duties included on-the-job training in law enforcement techniques and Petitioner acknowledged that his duties as part of the unit to which he was assigned included bicycle training.

Citing Matter of Marsala v New York State & Local Employees' Retirement Sys., 14 AD3d 984, the Appellate Division observed that it had "previously recognized in comparable scenarios, incidents in which injuries are sustained while participating in a training exercise as part of routine job duties and involving normal risks related thereto, including police officers injured while practicing running dismounts during bicycle patrol training, do not constitute accidents for purposes of eligibility for accidental disability retirement benefits."

Finding that substantial evidence supported the Comptroller's determination, the Appellate Division said "it will not be disturbed".

Click HERE to access the Appellate Division's decision posted on the Internet.

=============

Disability Benefits for New York State and municipal public sector personnel - an e-book focusing on administering the Retirement and Social Security Law, the General Municipal Law Sections 207-a/207-c and similar laws providing disability benefits to employees of the State of New York and its political subdivisions. For more information and access to a free excerpt of the material presented in this e-book, click here: http://booklocker.com/books/3916.html

 

CAUTION

Subsequent court and administrative rulings, or changes to laws, rules and regulations may have modified or clarified or vacated or reversed the information and, or, decisions summarized in NYPPL. For example, New York State Department of Civil Service's Advisory Memorandum 24-08 reflects changes required as the result of certain amendments to §72 of the New York State Civil Service Law to take effect January 1, 2025 [See Chapter 306 of the Laws of 2024]. Advisory Memorandum 24-08 in PDF format is posted on the Internet at https://www.cs.ny.gov/ssd/pdf/AM24-08Combined.pdf. Accordingly, the information and case 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.
NYPPL Blogger 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.
New York Public Personnel Law. Email: publications@nycap.rr.com