Schnyderite v. Brown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Schnyderite v. Brown

227 A.D.2d 286, 642 N.Y.S.2d 313, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5381

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

DecidedMay 21, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 227 A.D.2d 286 (Schnyderite v. Brown) 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

Schnyderite v. Brown, 227 A.D.2d 286, 642 N.Y.S.2d 313, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5381 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Schackman, J.), entered March 17, 1995, which denied petitioner’s application brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking to annul respondent Board of Trustees’ determination denying petitioner accident disability retirement benefits and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

There was sufficient evidence to support the determination of the Board of Trustees that petitioner was not physically disabled from performing his duties, since repeated examinations indicated that his cervical range of motion was within normal limits and that there was no evidence of shoulder or arm atrophy. As for the psychological aspect of petitioner’s retirement application, respondents were entitled to find that there was insufficient evidence to establish the existence of post traumatic stress syndrome (see, Matter of Whitton v Spinnato, 143 AD2d 274, 275). Moreover, as the IAS Court noted, the Medical Board was entitled to consider the period between the first automobile accident and the onset of the alleged disability, during which petitioner apparently performed his duties effectively, in making its recommendation that no causal connection exists between the incidents and the claimed disability (see, Matter of Bevers v New York City Employees’ Retirement Sys., 179 AD2d 489, lv denied 79 NY2d 758). Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

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

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Schackman, J.), entered March 17, 1995, which denied petitioner’s application brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking to annul respondent Board of Trustees’ determination denying petitioner accident disability retirement benefits and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

There was sufficient evidence to support the determination of the Board of Trustees that petitioner was not physically disabled from performing his duties, since repeated examinations indicated that his cervical range of motion was within normal limits and that there was no evidence of shoulder or arm atrophy. As for the psychological aspect of petitioner’s retirement application, respondents were entitled to find that there was insufficient evidence to establish the existence of post traumatic stress syndrome (see, Matter of Whitton v Spinnato, 143 AD2d 274, 275). Moreover, as the IAS Court noted, the Medical Board was entitled to consider the period between the first automobile accident and the onset of the alleged disability, during which petitioner apparently performed his duties effectively, in making its recommendation that no causal connection exists between the incidents and the claimed disability (see, Matter of Bevers v New York City Employees’ Retirement Sys., 179 AD2d 489, lv denied 79 NY2d 758). Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

227 A.D.2d 286, 642 N.Y.S.2d 313, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5381, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schnyderite-v-brown-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack