DeJesus v. Kelly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

DeJesus v. Kelly

121 A.D.3d 497, 993 N.Y.S.2d 505

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 14, 2014

Docket13211 102346/12

StatusPublished

This text of 121 A.D.3d 497 (DeJesus v. Kelly) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

DeJesus v. Kelly, 121 A.D.3d 497, 993 N.Y.S.2d 505 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

*498 Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol E. Huff, J.), entered October 19, 2012, denying the petition to annul respondents’ determination dated August 24, 2011, which denied petitioner’s applications for accidental disability and ordinary disability retirement benefits and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the matter remanded to respondent Board of Trustees for further proceedings consistent herewith.

The record does not demonstrate that the presidents of the Captain’s Endowment Association (CEA) and the Sergeant’s Benevolent Association (SBA) properly designated representatives to act in their absence in connection with the August 11, 2010 vote denying petitioner’s applications for accidental and ordinary disability benefits, or that the individuals from the CEA and the SBA who were present at the meeting were authorized to vote (see Administrative Code of City of NY § 13-216 [a] [1]-[12]; [d]). The record is also unclear as to the vote of the Detective Endowment Association, which appeared to have two representatives present. Although the Board of Trustees is entitled to rely on the judgment of the Medical Board, a determination by a properly constituted Board of Trustees is required (see Matter of Seiferheld v Kelly, 16 NY3d 561, 564 [2011]).

Concur — Tom, J.P, Sweeny, Renwick, Andrias and Clark, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

*498 Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol E. Huff, J.), entered October 19, 2012, denying the petition to annul respondents’ determination dated August 24, 2011, which denied petitioner’s applications for accidental disability and ordinary disability retirement benefits and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the matter remanded to respondent Board of Trustees for further proceedings consistent herewith.

The record does not demonstrate that the presidents of the Captain’s Endowment Association (CEA) and the Sergeant’s Benevolent Association (SBA) properly designated representatives to act in their absence in connection with the August 11, 2010 vote denying petitioner’s applications for accidental and ordinary disability benefits, or that the individuals from the CEA and the SBA who were present at the meeting were authorized to vote (see Administrative Code of City of NY § 13-216 [a] [1]-[12]; [d]). The record is also unclear as to the vote of the Detective Endowment Association, which appeared to have two representatives present. Although the Board of Trustees is entitled to rely on the judgment of the Medical Board, a determination by a properly constituted Board of Trustees is required (see Matter of Seiferheld v Kelly, 16 NY3d 561, 564 [2011]).

Concur — Tom, J.P, Sweeny, Renwick, Andrias and Clark, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

121 A.D.3d 497, 993 N.Y.S.2d 505, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dejesus-v-kelly-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack