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

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

DecidedMay 18, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 215 A.D.2d 256 (Smith v. New York City Employees' Retirement System) 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

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

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 A.D.2d 256, 626 N.Y.S.2d 200, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5320, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-new-york-city-employees-retirement-system-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack