Matter of Alessio v. New York City Employees'ret. Sys.

New York Court of Appeals

Matter of Alessio v. New York City Employees'ret. Sys.

494 N.E.2d 97, 67 N.Y.2d 978, 502 N.Y.S.2d 992, 1986 N.Y. LEXIS 18594

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 6, 1986

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 494 N.E.2d 97 (Matter of Alessio v. New York City Employees'ret. Sys.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Matter of Alessio v. New York City Employees'ret. Sys., 494 N.E.2d 97, 67 N.Y.2d 978, 502 N.Y.S.2d 992, 1986 N.Y. LEXIS 18594 (N.Y. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order should be affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Appellate Division that there is no basis for upsetting the determination denying petitioner’s application for accident disability retirement. The restrictive language of Administrative Code of the City of New York § B340.0 permits retirement on accident disability only where the "time, place and conditions” of whatever "resulted] in such disability” can be certified as "city-service”. Here it is not disputed that petitioner’s injury occurred while on the way to work rather than while actually engaged therein.

Petitioner’s reliance on case law construing Workers’ Compensation Law § 10 is misplaced. The language of that statute provides for benefits whenever the injury is one "arising out of and in the course of the employment”. By contrast, the language of section B3-40.0 of the Code limits accident disability benefits to those situations where actual "city service performed” results in the employee’s disability.

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone and Hancock, Jr., concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order should be affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Appellate Division that there is no basis for upsetting the determination denying petitioner’s application for accident disability retirement. The restrictive language of Administrative Code of the City of New York § B340.0 permits retirement on accident disability only where the "time, place and conditions” of whatever "resulted] in such disability” can be certified as "city-service”. Here it is not disputed that petitioner’s injury occurred while on the way to work rather than while actually engaged therein.

Petitioner’s reliance on case law construing Workers’ Compensation Law § 10 is misplaced. The language of that statute provides for benefits whenever the injury is one "arising out of and in the course of the employment”. By contrast, the language of section B3-40.0 of the Code limits accident disability benefits to those situations where actual "city service performed” results in the employee’s disability.

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone and Hancock, Jr., concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

494 N.E.2d 97, 67 N.Y.2d 978, 502 N.Y.S.2d 992, 1986 N.Y. LEXIS 18594, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-alessio-v-new-york-city-employeesret-sys-ny-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack