| Matter of Reynolds v DiNapoli |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 05374 [97 AD3d 892] |
| July 5, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| In the Matter of Thomas J. Reynolds, Petitioner, v ThomasP. DiNapoli, as State Comptroller Respondent. |
—[*1] Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Kathleen M. Treasure of counsel), forrespondent.
Stein, J. Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of theSupreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which deniedpetitioner's application for accidental disability retirement benefits.
Petitioner, a police officer, was permanently disabled as the result of injuries sustained whileattempting to subdue a suspect who had been handcuffed and placed in the rear of a police car.Petitioner's application for performance of duty disability retirement benefits was approved, buthis application for accidental disability retirement benefits was denied by respondent on theground that the incident did not constitute an accident within the meaning of the Retirement andSocial Security Law. Petitioner then commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challengethat determination.
We confirm. To establish entitlement to accidental disability retirement benefits, a petitionermust demonstrate that the incident giving rise to the injuries was a sudden mischance unrelatedto the ordinary risks of performing his or her job (see Matter of Lenci v DiNapoli, 92 AD3d 1078, 1078 [2012]; Matter of Rykala v New York StateComptroller, 92 AD3d 1077, [*2]1077-1078 [2012]).This Court has repeatedly upheld respondent's denial of accidental disability retirement benefitswhen a law enforcement officer sustains an injury in the course of restraining a disruptiveindividual, as that type of physical contact is inherent in the performance of an officer's duties(see Matter of Rykala v New York State Comptroller, 92 AD3d at 1077-1078; Matter of Carpiniello v DiNapoli, 88AD3d 1045, 1046 [2011]; Matter ofWelsh v New York State Comptroller, 67 AD3d 1167, 1169 [2009], lv denied14 NY3d 706 [2010]). Inasmuch as petitioner's own testimony indicated that he was injured inthe course of attempting to subdue an unruly suspect, we find that substantial evidence supportsrespondent's determination.
Peters, P.J., Lahtinen, Malone Jr. and Garry, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination isconfirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.