Labor & Employment Law

Injury resulting from ?self-help? held not to constitute an accident

By Harvey Randall, Esq.

Injury resulting from ?self-help? held not to constitute an accident
Matter of Joseph Conkling, Jr. v Hevesi, 42 A.D.3d 630

The Appellate Division sustained the New York State Employees? Retirement System?s rejection of Joseph Conkling, Jr.?s application for accidental disability retirement.

Conkling contended that he was entitled an accidental disability retirement allowance because he was injured while working as an elevator operator. According to the decision, Conkling was injured when he attempted to climb out of an elevator that had stopped approximately three feet below floor level.

The System had denied Conkling?s application after it determined that this incident did not constitute an ?accident? within the meaning of Retirement and Social Security Law §63.

Conkling then asked for a rehearing and amended his application to include allegations that ?his incapacity was the result of incidents that purportedly occurred in April 1988 and December 1995.?

The System rejected Conkling?s amended application, ruling that although he was permanently incapacitated from the performance of his duties, ?such incapacitation was not the natural and proximate result of an accident sustained while in service.? The System also decided that the April 1988 and November 1998 incidents did not constitute accidents.

Citing Matter of Cadiz v McCall, 236 AD2d 766, the Appellate Division said that for the purposes of eligibility for accidental disability retirement benefits, ?an injury that occurs without an unexpected event as the result of activity undertaken in the performance of ordinary employment duties (considered in view of the particular employment in question) is not an accidental injury.?

Finding that there was no error in the Retirement System?s finding that the incidents relied on by Conkling did not constitute an accident within the meaning of Retirement and Social Security Law Section 63, the Appellate Division dismissed his appeal.

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on April 11, 2008 (boomark / email).