From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Piccinini

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 3, 2009
68 A.D.3d 1212 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

No. 506430.

December 3, 2009.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which denied petitioner's application for accidental disability retirement benefits.

Law Firm of Alex C. Dell, Albany (Alex C. Dell of counsel), for petitioner.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, Albany (William E. Storrs of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Spain, Malone Jr. and Kavanagh, JJ., concur.


In October 2005, petitioner was injured when he tripped on an uneven section of sidewalk while performing a routine patrol in his capacity as a security service assistant for the State University of New York Police Department. After his application for accidental disability retirement benefits was disapproved, he requested a redetermination and a hearing was held. The Hearing Officer concluded that the incident did not constitute an accident within the meaning of Retirement and Social Security Law § 605 and denied petitioner's application. Respondent adopted the Hearing Officer's findings, prompting this CPLR article 78 proceeding.

Inasmuch as "injuries that arise out of an employee's own misstep or inattention will not merit an accidental disability determination" ( Matter of Magrino v DiNapoli, 64 AD3d 868, 869 ), we now confirm. Here, petitioner admitted that he patrolled the sector in which he fell on a regular basis. Moreover, although the incident occurred at approximately 1:00 A.M., petitioner acknowledged that there were lights in the area and that, having worked on the campus for almost seven years, he was "very familiar" with the sidewalks. Accordingly, we perceive no basis on which to disturb respondent's determination that petitioner's injury was not the result of "a sudden and extraordinary event that [was] unrelated to the ordinary risks of [his] employment" ( Matter of Santorsola v McCall, 302 AD2d 727, 728).

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.


Summaries of

In re Piccinini

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 3, 2009
68 A.D.3d 1212 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

In re Piccinini

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of BRUNO PICCININI, Petitioner, v. THOMAS P. DINAPOLI, as…

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

Date published: Dec 3, 2009

Citations

68 A.D.3d 1212 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 8920
889 N.Y.S.2d 730

Citing Cases

Scarselli v. N.Y. & Local Police & Fire Ret. Sys.

Significantly, no proof was presented that the sidewalk was defective nor was there any indication that…

Manning v. DiNapoli

Petitioner explained that the pothole was oval shaped and a couple of feet wide in diameter. In our view,…