Smith v. New York City Employees' Retirement System

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Smith v. New York City Employees' Retirement System

215 A.D.2d 256, 626 N.Y.S.2d 200, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5320

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 18, 1995·Published

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Stephen Crane, J.), entered March 9, 1994, which denied petitioner’s application pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul respondents’ determination denying petitioner’s application for an accidental disability pension, and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Respondents’ determination that the injury petitioner sustained to his shoulder and back when, in the course of his employment with the New York City Parks Department, he lifted a wheelbarrow into a dump truck, was not the result of an unexpected event, and thus not an "accident” within the meaning of Retirement and Social Security Law § 605 (b) (3), was not arbitrary and capricious (see, Matter of Lichtenstein v Board of Trustees, 57 NY2d 1010; Matter of Danyi v Board of Trustees, 176 AD2d 451). Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Ross and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Stephen Crane, J.), entered March 9, 1994, which denied petitioner’s application pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul respondents’ determination denying petitioner’s application for an accidental disability pension, and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Respondents’ determination that the injury petitioner sustained to his shoulder and back when, in the course of his employment with the New York City Parks Department, he lifted a wheelbarrow into a dump truck, was not the result of an unexpected event, and thus not an "accident” within the meaning of Retirement and Social Security Law § 605 (b) (3), was not arbitrary and capricious (see, Matter of Lichtenstein v Board of Trustees, 57 NY2d 1010; Matter of Danyi v Board of Trustees, 176 AD2d 451). Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Ross and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Smith v. New York City Employees' Retirement System, 215 A.D.2d 256, 626 N.Y.S.2d 200, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5320 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

215 A.D.2d 256 (Smith v. New York City Employees' Retirement System) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related