Matter of Bevers v. N.Y. City Emp. Retire

12 Citing cases

  1. Matter of Bevers v. N.Y. City Employees' Retirement

    79 N.Y.2d 758 (N.Y. 1992)

    Decided April 30, 1992 Appeal from (1st Dept: 179 A.D.2d 489) MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL GRANTED OR DENIED

  2. In the Matter of Bailey v. Kelly

    11 A.D.3d 208 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)   Cited 14 times

    The Medical Board interviewed petitioner, conducted a physical examination and reviewed her application and supporting medical documentation, which was not dispositive on the issue of whether her disability was "a natural and proximate result of an accidental injury received in . . . city-service" (Administrative Code of City of NY § 13-252). The Board of Trustees is entitled to rely on the Medical Board's recommendation as to causation even in the face of conflicting evidence ( Matter of Bevers v. New York City Employees' Retirement Sys., 179 AD2d 489; lv denied 79 NY2d 758), as long as it is based on some credible evidence ( Matter of Borenstein v. New York City Employees' Retirement Sys., 88 NY2d 756).

  3. In re Beckles v. Kerik

    1 A.D.3d 215 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)   Cited 3 times

    Respondent Police Commissioner found that petitioner's psychological disabilities did not arise solely out of a 1994 shooting incident in which petitioner killed one of three men attempting to hold up a beauty parlor in which she was a customer. The record contains credible evidence to support the findings of the Medical Board of the New York City Employee Retirement System as to the cause of petitioner's disability, and the Board of Trustees was entitled to rely on the Board's recommendation as to causation, "even in the face of conflicting evidence" (Matter of Bevers v. New York City Employees' Retirement Sys., 179 A.D.2d 489, 490, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 758). Thus, respondents' determination was not arbitrary and capricious (Matter of Borenstein v. New York City Employee Retirement Sys., 88 N.Y.2d 756, 760-761).

  4. In re Savidis v. B.O.E. Retirement System

    295 A.D.2d 437 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)   Cited 1 times

    ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs. The Supreme Court properly held that the determination denying accidental disability retirement benefits to the appellant was not arbitrary or capricious (see Matter of Bevers v. New York City Employees' Retirement Sys., 179 A.D.2d 489; Matter of Archul v. Board of Trustees of the New York City Fire Dept., 93 A.D.2d 716, affd 60 N.Y.2d 567). The appellant's remaining contention is without merit.

  5. In re Rochford v. Safir

    277 A.D.2d 65 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

    Respondent's determination that petitioner suffers from a disabling seizure disorder is supported by some credible evidence (see, Matter of Borenstein New York City Employees ' Retirement Sys., 88 N.Y.2d 756, 761), namely, the report of the Medical Board's neurologist that petitioner continues to be susceptible to a significant risk of seizures (see, id., at 761, citing Matter of Tobin, 64 N.Y.2d 254, 258-259). With respect to petitioner's claim for an accident disability pension, the IAS court correctly held that respondents could rationally reject petitioner `s claim that she sustained a head injury in the line of duty, or, assuming she did, could rationally conclude that she failed to sustain her burden of establishing a causal relationship between such injury and her seizure disorder (see, Matter of Duggan v. Ward, 160 A.D.2d 532;Matter of Bevers v. New York City Employees' Retirement Sys., 179 A.D.2d 489, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 758). THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

  6. In re Mooney

    234 A.D.2d 27 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

    Before: Milonas, J.P., Wallach, Kupferman, Tom and Andrias, JJ. The decision to deny petitioner an accident disability pension (Administrative Code of City of NY § 13-252) was rationally based ( Matter of Jordan v Bratton, 232 AD2d 204), since there was evidence to support the finding that there was no causal relationship between the 1978 line-of-duty incident and petitioner's present disability ( see, Matter of Borenstein v New York City Employees Retirement Sys., 88 NY2d 756). Petitioner remained on full-time duty for more than 10 years after the incident, did not seek any medical treatment for two three-year periods following the incident ( see, Matter of Bevers v New York City Employees' Retirement Sys., 179 AD2d 489, lv denied 79 NY2d 758), and there was a general lack of objective evidence to establish a causal link.

  7. In re Robert Jordan v. William Bratton

    232 A.D.2d 204 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)   Cited 1 times

    The denial of accident disability benefits being a consequence of a tie vote, petitioner must show that his 1990 disabling condition was a proximate result of his service related accidents, the last of which occurred in 1982 ( see, Matter of Canfora v Board of Trustees, 60 NY2d 347). Such cannot be said here if only because of the Medical Board's finding of no causation ( see, Matter of Williams v Ward, 227 AD2d 307), which was rationally based on evidence before it, including petitioner's lack of need for medical attention between 1982 and 1990, the negative results of x-rays taken after the accidents and the lack of "tingling" in the neck or cervical spine ( see, Matter of Bevers v New York City Empoyees' Retirement Sys., 179 AD2d 489, lv denied 79 NY2d 758).

  8. Matter of Schnyderite v. Brown

    227 A.D.2d 286 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

    As for the psychological aspect of petitioner's retirement application, respondents were entitled to find that there was insufficient evidence to establish the existence of post traumatic stress syndrome ( see, Matter of Whitton v. Spinnato, 143 A.D.2d 274, 275). Moreover, as the IAS Court noted, the Medical Board was entitled to consider the period between the first automobile accident and the onset of the alleged disability, during which petitioner apparently performed his duties effectively, in making its recommendation that no causal connection exists between the incidents and the claimed disability ( see, Matter of Bevers v New York City Employees' Retirement Sys., 179 A.D.2d 489, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 758). Concur — Milonas, J.P., Ellerin, Rubin, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

  9. Myers v. The N.Y.C. Emps' Ret. Sys.

    2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 33292 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2023)

    See Bailey v. Kelly, 11 A.D.3d 208, 208 (1st Dep't 2004); Bevers v. N.Y.C. Employees' Retirement System, 179 A.D.2d 489, 490 (1st Dep't 1992). However, a pension fund's Board of Trustees has a duty to scrutinize a Medical Board's actions and findings, and not simply adopt a deficient denial.

  10. In Matter of Almodovar v. Kelly

    2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 30595 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2011)

    While the Medical Board did not specifically state that its finding was based in part on petitioner's ability to work full duty between 1996 and 2006, that fact is included in its initial determination and it was entitled to consider it. (See Matter of Mooney v Bratton, 234 AD2d 27 [1st Dept 1996] [finding that there was evidence to support determination of no causal connection as petitioner remained on full duty for more than 10 years after accident, did not seek any medical treatment for two three-year periods during that time, and there was general lack of objective evidence establishing link]; Matter of Bevers v New York City Empls. 'Retirement Sys., 179 AD2d 489 [1st Dept 1992], lv denied 79 NY2d 758 [Medical Board could consider three-year period between accident and disability, during which petitioner worked full duty, in finding no causal connection]; Matter of Duggan v Ward, 160 AD2d 532 [1st Dept 1990] [minimal amount of time petitioner was absent from work due to injuries and substantial lapse of time between injuries and onset of ultimate disability constituted substantial evidence of lack of causal connection]; Belton v Herkommer, 84 AD2d 713 [1st Dept 1981] [finding that disability was unrelated to accident as two and half years elapsed between accident and surgery and plaintiff was able to work during that period]; Matter of Scotto v Bd. of Trustees of Police Pension Fund of City of N.Y., Art. II, 76 AD2d 774 [1st Dept 1980], affd 54 NY2d 918 [1981] [finding of no casual connection between accident and disability upheld where five years had elapsed between accident and onset of back pain without recurrence of back condition; Board e