From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Application Finazzo v. Safir

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 13, 2000
273 A.D.2d 75 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

June 13, 2000.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Diane Lebedeff, J.), entered February 19, 1999, which, insofar as appealed from, granted petitioner's application to annul respondents' denial of of an accident disability retirement pension, and remanded the matter to respondents for further proceedings, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Jeffrey L. Goldberg, for petitioner-respondent.

John Hogrogian, for respondents-appellants.

Before: Rosenberger, J.P., Mazzarelli, Ellerin, Rubin, Friedman, JJ.


Petitioner's line-of-duty report, which contains the version of the accident that respondents urge should be credited, states that petitioner fell in the precinct parking lot after he stepped out of his patrol car and, walking toward the station house, "tripped in a construction hole". As a matter of law, such fall was an accident within the meaning of Administrative Code of the City of New York § 13-252 (see, Matter of Starnella v. Bratton, 92 N.Y.2d 836, 839, citing Matter of McCambridge v. McGuire, 62 N.Y.2d 563).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

In re Application Finazzo v. Safir

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 13, 2000
273 A.D.2d 75 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

In re Application Finazzo v. Safir

Case Details

Full title:IN RE APPLICATION OF FRANK FINAZZO, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT, FOR A JUDGMENT…

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

Date published: Jun 13, 2000

Citations

273 A.D.2d 75 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
708 N.Y.S.2d 410

Citing Cases

Torres v. The N.Y.C. Emps' Ret. Sys.

The Court next addresses Respondents' third argument that tripping over such roadway condition is an…

Pastalove v. Kelly

Normal risks in most jobs are not unexpected ( see Matter of Gray v. Kerik, 15 A.D.3d 275, 275, 791 N.Y.S.2d…