Opinion
16027 Index No. 159540/20 Case No. 2021–04507
05-26-2022
In the Matter of Michele RAWLINS, Petitioner–Appellant, v. TEACHERS’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF the CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Respondents–Respondents.
Chet Lukaszewski, P.C., Mineola (Chester Lukaszewski of counsel), for appellant. Sylvia O. Hinds–Radix, Corporation Counsel, New York (Janet L. Zaleon of counsel), for respondent.
Chet Lukaszewski, P.C., Mineola (Chester Lukaszewski of counsel), for appellant.
Sylvia O. Hinds–Radix, Corporation Counsel, New York (Janet L. Zaleon of counsel), for respondent.
Manzanet–Daniels, J.P., Kapnick, Shulman, Rodriguez, Pitt, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Arthur Engoron, J.), entered on or about November 8, 2021, which denied the petition to annul respondents’ determination, dated July 22, 2020, denying petitioner's application for accidental disability retirement (ADR) benefits, and dismissed the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Petitioner, a former school principal, claims that she suffers from posttraumatic stress syndrome as a result of an incident that occurred on April 18, 2019, in which a former school cook returned to the school and confronted a school safety officer, demanding that petitioner return some of his possessions. Petitioner alleges that, unbeknownst to the former employee, she witnessed the confrontation from a distance and that she was placed in fear for her life. The police were called to the scene, but the former employee was not arrested. Petitioner never returned to work.
Respondent Teachers’ Retirement System's determination that petitioner is not entitled to ADR benefits is not arbitrary and capricious but based on the record (see Matter of Borenstein v. New York City Employees' Retirement Sys., 88 N.Y.2d 756, 760, 650 N.Y.S.2d 614, 673 N.E.2d 899 [1996] ). The Medical Board rationally found that petitioner's injuries resulted not from an accident in the work setting but from "[p]urposeful conduct" by a former coworker, which "is not an accident within the meaning of the pension statute" (see Matter of Kelly v. DiNapoli, 30 N.Y.3d 674, 682, 70 N.Y.S.3d 881, 94 N.E.3d 444 [2018] ["a petitioner is entitled to accidental disability retirement benefits when the injury was caused by ‘a precipitating accidental event ... which was not a risk of the work performed’ "]).
We have considered petitioner's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.