NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3.
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-1954-16T3
ELAINE GECHTMAN,
Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
TEACHERS' PENSION AND ANNUITY FUND,
Respondent-Respondent. ________________________________
Submitted June 19, 2018 - Decided July 27, 2018
Before Judges Simonelli and Koblitz.
On appeal from the Board of Trustees of the Teachers' Pension and Annuity Fund, TPAF No. 02013-2015N.
Bergman and Barrett, attorneys for appellant (Michael T. Barrett, of counsel and on the brief).
Gurbir S. Grewal, Attorney General, attorney for respondent (Melissa Dutton Schaffer, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Robert S. Garrison, Jr., Deputy Attorney General, on the brief).
PER CURIAM
Elaine Gechtman appeals from the December 2, 2016 final
determination of the Board of Trustees of the Teachers' Pension and Annuity Fund (TPAF) rejecting the Administrative Law Judge's
(ALJ) initial decision that Gechtman was totally and permanently
disabled and therefore eligible for ordinary disability retirement
benefits. We affirm.
Gechtman was first employed in October 2000, and retired on
July 1, 2014, after applying in May for a disability pension. On
December 5, 2014, the Board of TPAF initially found Gechtman, a
former Elizabeth elementary school teacher who retired after
almost fifteen years of work, was not totally and permanently
disabled from the performance of her regular and assigned duties,
and was therefore ineligible for a disability retirement. N.J.S.A.
18A:66-39(b). She appealed, and the matter was transferred to the
Office of Administrative Law where an ALJ conducted three days of
hearings. A delay in receiving transcripts led to the ALJ finally
requiring post-hearing submissions without the transcripts, four
months after the close of the hearing.
The ALJ found that Gechtman, then sixty-seven years old, had
worked as an "itinerant teacher, a position that was akin to a
floater and took her to different classrooms and buildings." The
ALJ found Gechtman was "constantly [] up and standing." She "would
often get on the floor" with the younger students and "involved
herself physically in teaching her students." Gechtman testified
that she had worked in the same building the last few years, where
2 A-1954-16T3 she had to climb stairs often when the elevator was broken, which
was extremely hard for her to do.
When she filed her ordinary disability retirement
application, Gechtman stated she suffered from1
Achilles bursitis/tendinitis and lumbar and back problems which includes having problems walking with stairs and bending, carrying thing in front of me.
A student swinging a backpack as I was walking down the stairs the backpack went under my foot and flipped me over the rest of the stairs and outside the building. I was heading towards the right and did not want to hurt the student I swung my body to the left and another student was there and I swung my body to the middle and ended up falling onto cement and ended up at the doctors.
Gechtman testified this accident occurred in October 2005.
She returned to work about a month later, although her physical
condition continued to deteriorate. Gechtman also submitted forms
from two treating doctors, a pain management specialist and Dr.
Walter Pedowitz, her treating orthopedic surgeon for the past ten
years, attesting to her inability to perform her duties. Dr.
Pedowitz stated in his certification that Gechtman suffered from
"spinal stenosis," and had physical symptoms of "weak legs,"
"spasms and difficulty walking." The ALJ found that not only was
it "difficult for Gechtman to . . . do her job," but that at home
1 We repeat the statement exactly as written, except that it was submitted in capital letters. 3 A-1954-16T3 she could not put on socks, climb stairs, wash laundry or dishes
or clean her own home. She could only drive a car for about
twenty-five minutes at a time.
Dr. David Weiss, Gechtman's testifying expert, conducted his
own examination, commenting on the disc bulges and surgery done
by Gechtman's treating doctor. His examination revealed
significant orthopedic difficulties and he commented that Gechtman
utilized a cane. He found that she is "unable to engage in her
job related functions." He described those functions in his
report, stating: "This job requires her to perform repetitive
bending with pre-school children, prolonged standing, going up and
down stairs, [and] getting the children out safely for fire
drills."
The ALJ found Dr. Weiss, who was qualified as an expert in
orthopedic medicine, more credible than the independent medical
examiner selected by the Board, Dr. Arnold Berman, finding that
"Berman examined an apparently very different Gechtman than any
other physician who examined her before or after him." After a
twenty-five to thirty minute physical examination, Berman found
no evidence of meniscal tears, although Gechtman had an operation
to repair a torn meniscus just one month after the examination.
When this information was provided to Dr. Berman, it did not change
his opinion.
4 A-1954-16T3 The ALJ found that Gechtman was "unable to perform the duties
and responsibilities of her general area of employment, which is
as a classroom teacher. Her ability to perform sedentary work is
clearly irrelevant for purposes of determining her eligibility for
a disability retirement pension, because her ordinary employment
is not sedentary." The ALJ reversed the Board's initial decision.
The Board pointed out that, unlike with lay witnesses, it
need not defer to the ALJ on the credibility of expert witnesses.
ZRB, LLC v. N.J. Dep't of Envtl. Prot., 403 N.J. Super. 531, 561
(App. Div. 2008); see N.J.S.A. 52:14B-10(c) (allowing the Board
to reject an ALJ's credibility findings with regard to a lay
witness only if those findings are arbitrary, capricious or
unreasonable or unsupported by sufficient credible evidence).
The Board rejected the ALJ's credibility findings with regard
to the experts, determining the ALJ rejected Dr. Berman's findings
with insufficient explanation. The Board believed the ALJ should
have weighed the different credentials of the two experts as Dr.
Berman was a board-certified orthopedist while Dr. Weiss was a
doctor of osteopathy who was not a board-certified orthopedist.
Most importantly, the Board found that the ALJ found only that
Gechtman could not perform the duties of her actual job, rather
than the job for which she was hired.
5 A-1954-16T3 Our review of administrative agency action is limited. We
generally "afford substantial deference to an agency's
interpretation of a statute that the agency is charged with
enforcing." Richardson v. Bd. of Trs., 192 N.J. 189, 196 (2007).
"Such deference has been specifically extended to state agencies
that administer pension statutes" because "'a state agency brings
experience and specialized knowledge to its task of administering
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3.
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-1954-16T3
ELAINE GECHTMAN,
Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
TEACHERS' PENSION AND ANNUITY FUND,
Respondent-Respondent. ________________________________
Submitted June 19, 2018 - Decided July 27, 2018
Before Judges Simonelli and Koblitz.
On appeal from the Board of Trustees of the Teachers' Pension and Annuity Fund, TPAF No. 02013-2015N.
Bergman and Barrett, attorneys for appellant (Michael T. Barrett, of counsel and on the brief).
Gurbir S. Grewal, Attorney General, attorney for respondent (Melissa Dutton Schaffer, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Robert S. Garrison, Jr., Deputy Attorney General, on the brief).
PER CURIAM
Elaine Gechtman appeals from the December 2, 2016 final
determination of the Board of Trustees of the Teachers' Pension and Annuity Fund (TPAF) rejecting the Administrative Law Judge's
(ALJ) initial decision that Gechtman was totally and permanently
disabled and therefore eligible for ordinary disability retirement
benefits. We affirm.
Gechtman was first employed in October 2000, and retired on
July 1, 2014, after applying in May for a disability pension. On
December 5, 2014, the Board of TPAF initially found Gechtman, a
former Elizabeth elementary school teacher who retired after
almost fifteen years of work, was not totally and permanently
disabled from the performance of her regular and assigned duties,
and was therefore ineligible for a disability retirement. N.J.S.A.
18A:66-39(b). She appealed, and the matter was transferred to the
Office of Administrative Law where an ALJ conducted three days of
hearings. A delay in receiving transcripts led to the ALJ finally
requiring post-hearing submissions without the transcripts, four
months after the close of the hearing.
The ALJ found that Gechtman, then sixty-seven years old, had
worked as an "itinerant teacher, a position that was akin to a
floater and took her to different classrooms and buildings." The
ALJ found Gechtman was "constantly [] up and standing." She "would
often get on the floor" with the younger students and "involved
herself physically in teaching her students." Gechtman testified
that she had worked in the same building the last few years, where
2 A-1954-16T3 she had to climb stairs often when the elevator was broken, which
was extremely hard for her to do.
When she filed her ordinary disability retirement
application, Gechtman stated she suffered from1
Achilles bursitis/tendinitis and lumbar and back problems which includes having problems walking with stairs and bending, carrying thing in front of me.
A student swinging a backpack as I was walking down the stairs the backpack went under my foot and flipped me over the rest of the stairs and outside the building. I was heading towards the right and did not want to hurt the student I swung my body to the left and another student was there and I swung my body to the middle and ended up falling onto cement and ended up at the doctors.
Gechtman testified this accident occurred in October 2005.
She returned to work about a month later, although her physical
condition continued to deteriorate. Gechtman also submitted forms
from two treating doctors, a pain management specialist and Dr.
Walter Pedowitz, her treating orthopedic surgeon for the past ten
years, attesting to her inability to perform her duties. Dr.
Pedowitz stated in his certification that Gechtman suffered from
"spinal stenosis," and had physical symptoms of "weak legs,"
"spasms and difficulty walking." The ALJ found that not only was
it "difficult for Gechtman to . . . do her job," but that at home
1 We repeat the statement exactly as written, except that it was submitted in capital letters. 3 A-1954-16T3 she could not put on socks, climb stairs, wash laundry or dishes
or clean her own home. She could only drive a car for about
twenty-five minutes at a time.
Dr. David Weiss, Gechtman's testifying expert, conducted his
own examination, commenting on the disc bulges and surgery done
by Gechtman's treating doctor. His examination revealed
significant orthopedic difficulties and he commented that Gechtman
utilized a cane. He found that she is "unable to engage in her
job related functions." He described those functions in his
report, stating: "This job requires her to perform repetitive
bending with pre-school children, prolonged standing, going up and
down stairs, [and] getting the children out safely for fire
drills."
The ALJ found Dr. Weiss, who was qualified as an expert in
orthopedic medicine, more credible than the independent medical
examiner selected by the Board, Dr. Arnold Berman, finding that
"Berman examined an apparently very different Gechtman than any
other physician who examined her before or after him." After a
twenty-five to thirty minute physical examination, Berman found
no evidence of meniscal tears, although Gechtman had an operation
to repair a torn meniscus just one month after the examination.
When this information was provided to Dr. Berman, it did not change
his opinion.
4 A-1954-16T3 The ALJ found that Gechtman was "unable to perform the duties
and responsibilities of her general area of employment, which is
as a classroom teacher. Her ability to perform sedentary work is
clearly irrelevant for purposes of determining her eligibility for
a disability retirement pension, because her ordinary employment
is not sedentary." The ALJ reversed the Board's initial decision.
The Board pointed out that, unlike with lay witnesses, it
need not defer to the ALJ on the credibility of expert witnesses.
ZRB, LLC v. N.J. Dep't of Envtl. Prot., 403 N.J. Super. 531, 561
(App. Div. 2008); see N.J.S.A. 52:14B-10(c) (allowing the Board
to reject an ALJ's credibility findings with regard to a lay
witness only if those findings are arbitrary, capricious or
unreasonable or unsupported by sufficient credible evidence).
The Board rejected the ALJ's credibility findings with regard
to the experts, determining the ALJ rejected Dr. Berman's findings
with insufficient explanation. The Board believed the ALJ should
have weighed the different credentials of the two experts as Dr.
Berman was a board-certified orthopedist while Dr. Weiss was a
doctor of osteopathy who was not a board-certified orthopedist.
Most importantly, the Board found that the ALJ found only that
Gechtman could not perform the duties of her actual job, rather
than the job for which she was hired.
5 A-1954-16T3 Our review of administrative agency action is limited. We
generally "afford substantial deference to an agency's
interpretation of a statute that the agency is charged with
enforcing." Richardson v. Bd. of Trs., 192 N.J. 189, 196 (2007).
"Such deference has been specifically extended to state agencies
that administer pension statutes" because "'a state agency brings
experience and specialized knowledge to its task of administering
and regulating a legislative enactment within its field of
expertise.'" Piatt v. Police & Firemen's Ret. Sys., 443 N.J.
Super. 80, 99 (App. Div. 2015) (quoting In re Election Law Enf't
Comm'n Advisory Op. No. 01-2008, 201 N.J. 254, 262 (2010)). We
are not, however, "bound by the agency's interpretation of a
statute or its determination of a strictly legal issue."
Richardson, 192 N.J. at 196 (quoting In re Taylor, 158 N.J. 644,
658 (1999)).
The burden of proof of ordinary disability lies with the
employee. Bueno v. Bd. of Trs. Teachers' Pension & Annuity Fund,
404 N.J. Super. 119, 126 (App. Div. 2008), certif. denied, 199
N.J. 540 (2009). The employee "must establish incapacity to
perform duties in the general area of [her] ordinary employment
rather than merely showing inability to perform the specific job
for which [she] was hired." Skulski v. Nolan, 68 N.J. 179, 205-
06 (1975).
6 A-1954-16T3 The duties of a classroom teacher are defined as follows:
To assist students to fulfill their potential for intellectual, emotional, physical and psychological growth, and to provide them with the knowledge and skills essential for full participation as responsible citizens.
No physical requirements are included in this job description. As
the ALJ noted, the description tells what should be done, but not
how. Presumably, the job could be performed by an employee who
utilizes a wheelchair to ambulate. Although Gechtman performed
her particular job with significant physical effort, she did not
demonstrate that standing for long periods of time, climbing
stairs, sitting on the floor and carrying things were necessary
to teach young children in other settings.
We note that people in their mid-sixties frequently have
physical limitations such as those experienced by Gechtman. The
Board has the obligation to safeguard pension resources. In re
Town of Harrison, 440 N.J. Super. 268, 300 (App. Div. 2015).
We must affirm an administrative decision even if we might
have decided differently. Campbell v. N.J. Racing Comm'n, 169
N.J. 579, 587 (2001). The Board determined, in essence, that no
particular physical strength or mobility was required to perform
the kindergarten through eighth-grade teaching job. Thus,
regardless of the derivation of Gechtman's injury, or the
7 A-1954-16T3 credibility of the experts, she is not disabled. We defer to the
Board's expertise.
Affirmed.
8 A-1954-16T3