Shafran v. New York City Employees' Retirement System

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Shafran v. New York City Employees' Retirement System

199 A.D.2d 224, 608 N.Y.S.2d 64

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Shafran v. New York City Employees' Retirement System. Read the opinion of the Court — 234 A.D.2d 444 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 30, 1993·Published

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.) entered March 18, 1993, which granted respondents’ cross motion to dismiss the petition as time-barred, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

[225]*225In 1986, respondent New York City Employees’ Retirement System unambiguously rejected in writing petitioner’s request for transfer of retirement benefits from Plan A to Plan B. Therefore, this action commenced in July 1992 is time-barred (see, Matter of Edmead v McGuire, 67 NY2d 714). Petitioner’s breach of contract claim based on the 1988 recoupment agreement between the parties was not raised before the IAS Court and, in any event, is without merit. (Recovery Consultants v Shih-Hsieh, 141 AD2d 272, 276). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman and Rubin, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.) entered March 18, 1993, which granted respondents’ cross motion to dismiss the petition as time-barred, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

[225]*225In 1986, respondent New York City Employees’ Retirement System unambiguously rejected in writing petitioner’s request for transfer of retirement benefits from Plan A to Plan B. Therefore, this action commenced in July 1992 is time-barred (see, Matter of Edmead v McGuire, 67 NY2d 714). Petitioner’s breach of contract claim based on the 1988 recoupment agreement between the parties was not raised before the IAS Court and, in any event, is without merit. (Recovery Consultants v Shih-Hsieh, 141 AD2d 272, 276). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman and Rubin, JJ.

Shafran v. New York City Employees' Retirement System, 199 A.D.2d 224, 608 N.Y.S.2d 64 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

199 A.D.2d 224 (Shafran v. New York City Employees' Retirement System) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related