Dering v. Regan

177 A.D.2d 931, 576 N.Y.S.2d 685, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15221
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 27, 1991
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 177 A.D.2d 931 (Dering v. Regan) 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
Dering v. Regan, 177 A.D.2d 931, 576 N.Y.S.2d 685, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15221 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Opinion

Weiss, J.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent Comptroller which denied petitioner’s application for accidental disability retirement benefits.

On June 1, 1989, a City of Yonkers firefighter filed an application for accidental disability retirement benefits claiming that he injured his right knee in a fall from a ladder at a fire scene on March 31, 1972. Respondent Comptroller found that the injury occurred when petitioner misstepped on a ladder and concluded that the incident was a risk inherent in petitioner’s occupation and did not constitute an accident within the meaning of Retirement and Social Security Law § 363. Petitioner commenced this proceeding contending that the determination is not supported by substantial evidence in the record.

The determination must be confirmed. A report by petitioner’s co-worker indicates that he observed petitioner "slip off the ladder and fall to the ground” at the fire scene. This report provides an evidentiary basis to support the finding that petitioner’s fall was the result of a misstep which is a risk inherent in the duties of a firefighter at the scene of a fire (see, Matter of Chambers v Regan, 125 AD2d 920; Matter of Finnegan v Regan, 116 AD2d 878).

Petitioner contends that his misstep was the result of an unusual shift in the ladder which was a precipitating acciden[932]*932tal event, not an inherent risk of the work performed (see, Matter of McCambridge v McGuire, 62 NY2d 563, 568). The Comptroller was not required to accept this explanation as determinative of the facts, particularly in the absence of any reference to a ladder shift in the report by petitioner’s coworker, who was present holding and bracing the ladder.

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

Related

Slagle v. McCall
293 A.D.2d 923 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Butler v. McCall
221 A.D.2d 892 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
Balduzzi v. McCall
220 A.D.2d 796 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
Keller v. Regan
212 A.D.2d 856 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
Riggins v. Regan
199 A.D.2d 898 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
Seim v. Regan
191 A.D.2d 931 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
Okon v. Regan
185 A.D.2d 438 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
Michel v. Regan
179 A.D.2d 847 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
177 A.D.2d 931, 576 N.Y.S.2d 685, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15221, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dering-v-regan-nyappdiv-1991.