From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gill v. Board of Trustees

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 21, 2007
41 A.D.3d 280 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. 1390-1391.

June 21, 2007.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael D. Stallman, J.), entered June 12, 2006, which denied petitioner police officer's application to annul respondent Board of Trustees' determination denying petitioner an accidental disability retirement, and directed entry of judgment dismissing the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Eisner Associates, P.C., New York (Eugene G. Eisner of counsel), for appellant.

Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Susan B. Eisner of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Sullivan, J.P., Nardelli, Williams, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.


Where, as here, the determination of the Board of Trustees is the result of a tie vote, a court may not set aside the denial of an accidental disability retirement "unless it can be determined as a matter of law on the record that the disability was the natural and proximate result of a service-related accident" ( Matter of Meyer v Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, 90 NY2d 139, 145 [internal quotation marks omitted]). Since there is no credible evidence in the record causally relating petitioner's disabling seizures to dehydration or heat exhaustion or to trauma, the Board of Trustees determination must be affirmed.


Summaries of

Gill v. Board of Trustees

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 21, 2007
41 A.D.3d 280 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

Gill v. Board of Trustees

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JAMES GILL, Appellant, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE POLICE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jun 21, 2007

Citations

41 A.D.3d 280 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 5420
838 N.Y.S.2d 542

Citing Cases

In re Collett

The implications of such a holding and the impact it would necessarily have on the Retirement System is…