Kopec v. Kelly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kopec v. Kelly

221 A.D.2d 252, 634 N.Y.S.2d 65, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12143

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

DecidedNovember 28, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 221 A.D.2d 252 (Kopec 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

Kopec v. Kelly, 221 A.D.2d 252, 634 N.Y.S.2d 65, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12143 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert Lippmann, J.), entered on or about January 25, 1994, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking to annul respondents’ determination denying petitioner’s application for accidental disability retirement benefits, denied the application, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner was shot by a fellow police officer, with whom he was romantically involved, while visiting her in her home and [253]*253off-duty, and claims that he was attempting to disarm her. While petitioner’s off-duty status does not necessarily preclude a line-of-duty finding, it is also true that petitioner’s attempt to disarm his assailant does not, as the IAS Court aptly put it, necessarily "transform a personal drama in which he was a principal player into a police action undertaken in the line of duty”. Petitioner’s off-duty status, his personal relationship with his assailant, the occurrence of the incident in a private residence, and the absence of any threat to the public at large combine to provide a rational basis for respondents’ determination that petitioner was not in "city-service” within the meaning of Administrative Code of the City of New York § 13-252. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Ross, Williams and Tom, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert Lippmann, J.), entered on or about January 25, 1994, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking to annul respondents’ determination denying petitioner’s application for accidental disability retirement benefits, denied the application, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner was shot by a fellow police officer, with whom he was romantically involved, while visiting her in her home and [253]*253off-duty, and claims that he was attempting to disarm her. While petitioner’s off-duty status does not necessarily preclude a line-of-duty finding, it is also true that petitioner’s attempt to disarm his assailant does not, as the IAS Court aptly put it, necessarily "transform a personal drama in which he was a principal player into a police action undertaken in the line of duty”. Petitioner’s off-duty status, his personal relationship with his assailant, the occurrence of the incident in a private residence, and the absence of any threat to the public at large combine to provide a rational basis for respondents’ determination that petitioner was not in "city-service” within the meaning of Administrative Code of the City of New York § 13-252. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Ross, Williams and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

221 A.D.2d 252, 634 N.Y.S.2d 65, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12143, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kopec-v-kelly-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack