Matter of Santiago v. O'Neill
This text of 2020 NY Slip Op 3996 (Matter of Santiago v. O'Neill) 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.
Opinion
| Matter of Santiago v O'Neill |
| 2020 NY Slip Op 03996 |
| Decided on July 16, 2020 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Decided on July 16, 2020
Manzanet-Daniels, J.P., Mazzarelli, Gesmer, Oing, Singh, JJ.
11837 100856/18
v
James O'Neill, etc., et al., Respondents-Appellants.
James E. Johnson, Corporation Counsel, New York (Jonathan A. Popolow of counsel), for appellants.
Goldberg & McEnaney, LLC, Port Washington (Jeffrey L. Goldberg and Timothy McEnaney of counsel), for respondent.
Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (John J. Kelley, J.), entered February 19, 2019, annulling the determination, dated March 15, 2018, of respondent Board of Trustees of the Police Pension Fund, Article II, which denied petitioner accidental disability retirement (ADR) benefits, unanimously reversed, on the law, the judgment vacated, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, dismissed, without costs.
The denial of ADR benefits to petitioner is not arbitrary and capricious because members of the Board of Trustees determined that petitioner's traversing of unfamiliar staircases in unfamiliar locations is a routine risk of a police officer's job (see Matter of Starnella v Bratton , 92 NY2d 836, 839 [1998]). Moreover, the Board observed that the steps on which petitioner tripped do not appear to be defective or damaged, and the lip that caused the injury appears to be a permanent part of the design of the staircase and was painted yellow.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
ENTERED: JULY 16, 2020
CLERK
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2020 NY Slip Op 3996, 125 N.Y.S.3d 546, 185 A.D.3d 494, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-santiago-v-oneill-nyappdiv-2020.