Petitioner, a police detective assigned to an executive protection detail, filed an application for accidental disability retirement benefits contending that he was permanently incapacitated from the performance of his duties as the result of an incident that occurred in the course of his performance of his duties.
The New York State and Local Police and Fire Retirement System [ERS] denied Petitioner's application based on its determination the underlying incident did not constitute an accident within the meaning of Retirement and Social Security Law §363. Petitioner filed an administrative appeal.
An Administrative Hearing Officer sustained the ERS ruling after an administrative hearing. Petitioner then initiated a CPLR Article 78 proceeding challenging the ERS ruling.
Citing Matter of Stefanik v Gardner, 236 AD3d 75, the Appellate Division dismissed Plaintiff's appeal, explaining:
1. "As the applicant, [Petitioner] bore the burden of establishing that his disability arose from an accident within the meaning of the Retirement and Social Security Law, ERS's determination in this regard will be upheld if supported by substantial evidence;
2. "An accident in this context means a sudden, fortuitous mischance, unexpected, out of the ordinary, and injurious in impact";*
3. Petitioner testified that on the day in question he was assigned to the executive protection detail and, in that capacity, had transported a county executive to various meetings and that he did not recall anything significant events having occurring in the course of his performing such tasks; and
4. The record did not indicate that Petitioner had engaged in any particularly stressful or strenuous activity in the course of Petitioner's performance of such duties
Based on the record, the Appellate Division held the Petitioner failed to satisfy his burden of establishing that his disability arose from an accident within the meaning of the Retirement and Social Security Law, disagreeing with Petitioner's argument to the extent that he had contended that "the chest pain he experienced — in and of itself — was sudden and unexpected and, hence, qualified as a precipitating accidental event".
Accordingly, the Court ruled that "ERS's determination denying Petitioner's application for accidental disability retirement benefits will not be disturbed".
* See Matter of Stefanik v Gardner, 236 AD3d 75.
Click HERE to access the Appellate Division's decision posted on the Internet.