Mascolino v. McCall

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mascolino v. McCall

213 A.D.2d 960, 624 N.Y.S.2d 305, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3351

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

DecidedMarch 30, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 213 A.D.2d 960 (Mascolino v. McCall) 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

Mascolino v. McCall, 213 A.D.2d 960, 624 N.Y.S.2d 305, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3351 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—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.

In ruling on petitioner’s request for accidental disability retirement benefits, respondent Comptroller found that at the [961]*961time of the alleged incident, petitioner, a correction officer, had not yet entered the building where he worked, obtained his key and notebooks, or attended any pretour of duty briefings. Based on these findings, the Comptroller concluded that the alleged injury was not sustained in the performance of petitioner’s duties and therefore denied the application for benefits. Inasmuch as the Comptroller’s decision is supported by substantial evidence, it must be upheld.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

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

—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.

In ruling on petitioner’s request for accidental disability retirement benefits, respondent Comptroller found that at the [961]*961time of the alleged incident, petitioner, a correction officer, had not yet entered the building where he worked, obtained his key and notebooks, or attended any pretour of duty briefings. Based on these findings, the Comptroller concluded that the alleged injury was not sustained in the performance of petitioner’s duties and therefore denied the application for benefits. Inasmuch as the Comptroller’s decision is supported by substantial evidence, it must be upheld.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

213 A.D.2d 960, 624 N.Y.S.2d 305, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3351, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mascolino-v-mccall-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack