Castellano v. City of New York
| Citation | 142 F.3d 58 |
| Decision Date | 24 February 1998 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 96-7920,96-9004,s. 96-7920 |
| Parties | 21 Employee Benefits Cas. 2697, 9 A.D. Cases 67, 12 NDLR P 1 Peter CASTELLANO, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Defendants-Appellees. Ronald GRABOSKI, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Rudolph GUILIANI, et al., Defendants-Appellees. Alphonse ADORNETTI, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. NEW YORK CITY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM, et al., Defendants-Appellees. John A. CLIFFORD, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. NEW YORK POLICE PENSION FUND, et al., Defendants-Appellees. Serafino F. VELARDI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The NEW YORK CITY FIRE DEPARTMENT PENSION FUND, Defendant-Appellee. (CON), 96-9257, 96-9289, 96-9601, 96-9237. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit) |
Ronald Podolsky, Hauppauge, NY, for Plaintiffs-Appellants in Docket Nos. 96-7920 and 96-9004(CON).
Irving Anolik, New York City, for Plaintiff-Appellant Peter Harris in Docket Nos. 96-7920 and 96-9004(CON).
James J. Dwyer, New York City (Paul A. Crotty, Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, John Hogrogian, Pamela Seider Dolgow, Anshel David, Marta B. Soja, of counsel, on the brief) for Municipal Defendants-Appellees in Docket Nos. 96-7920 and 96-9004(CON).
Martin Bienstock, Assistant Attorney General, New York City (Dennis C. Vacco, Attorney General of the State of New York, Barbara G. Billet, Solicitor General, Thomas D. Hughes, Assistant Solicitor General, of counsel, on the brief), for State Defendants-Appellees in Docket Nos. 96-7920 and 96-9004(CON).
Elliot I. Susser, Lysaght, Lysaght & Kramer, P.C., Lake Success, NY, for Defendants-Appellees The Patrolmen's Benevolent Association of the City of New York and their Trustees on the Police Pension Fund in Docket Nos. 96-7920 and 96-9004(CON).
Jennifer S. Goldstein, Washington, DC (C. Gregory Stewart, General Counsel, Gwendolyn Young Reams, Associate General Counsel, Lorraine C. Davis, Assistant General Counsel, on the brief) Amicus Curiae, for Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in Docket Nos. 96-7920 and 96-9004(CON).
Edward Copeland, Cary Lacheen, New York Lawyers for the Public Interest, New York City, Robert L. Schonfeld, Stein & Schonfeld, New York City, Amicus Curiae, for American Civil Liberties Union, et al. in Docket Nos. 96-7920 and 96-9004(CON).
Kevin P. Fitzpatrick, Williston Park, NY (Kevin P. Fitzpatrick, P.C., Williston Park, NY, Martin N. Silberman, Marc Alain Steier, Silberman & Rhine, P.C., New York City, on the brief) for Plaintiffs-Appellants in Docket No. 96-9257.
James J. Dwyer, New York City (Paul A. Crotty, Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, John Hogrogian, Pamela Seider Dolgow, Anshel David, Marta B. Soja, of
counsel, on the brief), for Municipal Defendants-Appellees in Docket No. 96-9257.
Tina Kremenezky, New York City (Richard M. Betheil, Pryor, Cashman, Sherman & Flynn, New York City, joining in the brief for Municipal Appellees), for Defendant-Appellee Uniformed Fire Officers Association and Uniformed Fire Officers Association Executive Board in Docket No. 96-9257.
Michael N. Block, New York City (Sullivan & Liapakis, New York City), for Defendants-Appellees Uniformed Firefighters Association and Trustees in Docket No. 96-9257.
Daniel T. Campbell, P.C., Daniel T. Campbell, Floral Park, NY, for Amicus Curiae COAPP-VSF, Inc. in Docket No. 96-9257.
Martin N. Silberman, New York City (Silberman & Rhine, P.C., New York City, Kevin P. Fitzpatrick, Kevin P. Fitzpatrick, P.C., Williston Park, NY, on the brief), for Plaintiffs-Appellants in Docket No. 96-9289.
James J. Dwyer, New York City (Paul A. Crotty, Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, John Hogrogian, Pamela Seider Dolgow, Anshel David, Marta B. Soja, of counsel, on the brief), for Municipal Defendants-Appellees in Docket No. 96-9289.
Tina Kremenezky, New York City (Richard M. Betheil, Pryor, Cashman, Sherman & Flynn, New York City), for Defendant-Appellee Uniformed Fire Officers Association and Uniformed Fire Officers Association Executive Board in Docket No. 96-9289.
Michael N. Block, New York City (Sullivan & Liapakis, New York City), for Defendants-Appellees Uniformed Firefighters Association and Trustees in Docket No. 96-9289.
Dennis C. Vacco, Attorney General of the State of New York, New York City, Barbara G. Billet, Solicitor General, Thomas D. Hughes, Assistant Solicitor General, Martin Bienstock, Assistant Attorney General, of Counsel, New York City, for State Defendants-Appellees in Docket No. 96-9289.
John A. Clifford, Pro Se, Long Beach, NY, in Docket No. 96-9601.
James J. Dwyer, New York City (Paul A. Crotty, Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, John Hogrogian, of counsel), for Municipal Defendants-Appellees in Docket No. 96-9601.
Serafino F. Velardi, Pro Se, Port St. Lucie, FL, in Docket No. 96-9237.
John Hogrogian, New York City (Paul A. Crotty, Corporation Counsel of the City of New York, New York City), for Defendant-Appellee in Docket No. 96-9237.
Before: OAKES, WALKER, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
In this appeal, various classes of police and fire officers in New York City who retired with disability pensions press their claims, rejected below, that the city and applicable pension funds are discriminating against them by denying them benefits from more lucrative variable supplement funds ("VSF") that are available only to retirees who retire after twenty years of service and who do not already receive disability pensions. This appeal also presents the threshold issue of whether a retiree on disability who is presently unable to perform the "essential functions" of his former employment can still be a "qualified individual with a disability" within Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act for the purpose of challenging alleged discrimination in the provision of fringe benefits. We answer this threshold question in the affirmative; however, with one exception we agree with the district courts that there is no disability discrimination in these cases and thus the motions to dismiss by defendants-appellees were properly granted. We also address and reject appellants' various arguments challenging the VSF statutory scheme under the United States Constitution and other federal statutes.
The following are the different groups of appellants, the judgments they have appealed from, and their claims before this court.
Plaintiffs-appellants Peter Castellano et al. ("Castellano appellants") appeal from the June 28, 1996 judgment by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Sidney H. Stein, Judge ) dismissing, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), their complaint under Titles I and II of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") of 1990 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 791 et seq., the Age Discrimination in Employment Act ("ADEA") of 1967, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq., the First Amendment, the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, and various claims under New York law. (No. 96-7920). See Castellano v. City of New York, 946 F.Supp. 249 (S.D.N.Y.1996).
Plaintiffs-appellants Ronald Graboski et al. ("Graboski appellants") and Serafino F. Velardi ("Velardi") appeal from the September 5, 1996 judgment by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Lewis A. Kaplan, Judge) dismissing, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), the Graboski appellants' complaint under Titles I and II of the ADA, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the ADEA, the Contracts Clause, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and various claims under New York law, (No. 96-9257), and dismissing Velardi's complaint under Title I of the ADA. (No. 96-9237). See Graboski v. Guiliani, 937 F.Supp. 258 (S.D.N.Y.1996).
Plaintiffs-appellants Alphonse Adornetti et al. ("Adornetti appellants") appeal from the September 9, 1996 judgment by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Eugene H. Nickerson, Judge) dismissing, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), their complaint under Titles I and II of the ADA, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the Contracts Clause, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Takings Clause, and various claims under New York law. (No. 96-9289). See Adornetti v. New York City Employees' Retirement Sys., No. CV 95-3842, 1996 WL 518097 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 28, 1996).
Plaintiffs-appellants John A. Clifford et al. ("Clifford appellants") appeal from the March 6, 1997 judgment by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Sidney H. Stein, Judge) dismissing, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), their complaint under Title I of the ADA. (No. 96-9601). See Clifford v. New York City Police Pension Fund, No. 96-CV-6806 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 6, 1997).
Plaintiff-appellant Peter Harris ("Harris") appeals from the July 17, 1996 judgment by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Kevin Thomas Duffy, Judge ) dismissing, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), Harris's complaint under Title I of the ADA. See Houlihan v. City of New York, No. 95-CV-6373, 1996 WL 393576 (S.D.N.Y. July 15, 1996). Harris's appeal has been consolidated with the Castellano appeal, is included in the Castellano caption, and has the docket number 96-9004. Harris's ADA claim is considered together with that of the Castellano appellants.
We affirm all of the above judgments (Nos. 96-7920, 96-9257, 96-9289, 96-9601, 96-9004) except for the judgment dismissing Velardi's complaint...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dark-Eyes v. Com'R of Revenue Services, No. 17140.
...(Statutes should be interpreted to avoid untenable distinctions and unreasonable results whenever possible.); Castellano v. City of New York, 142 F.3d 58, 67 (2d Cir.1998) (Where the language is ambiguous, we focus upon the broader context and primary purpose of the statute.)." (Internal qu......
-
Hatch v. Pitney Bowes, Inc.
...and may bring ADA discrimination claims. See Ford v. Schering-Plough Corp., 145 F.3d 601, 607 (3d Cir. 1998); Castellano v. City of NY, 142 F.3d 58, 66-70 (2d Cir.1998). Additionally, and in spite of August, a number of courts within this circuit have aligned themselves with the Second and ......
-
Fitts v. Federal Nat. Mortg. Ass'n, Civil Action No. 98-617(RMU).
...or without reasonable accommodations yet who, at the time of suit, are completely disabled." Ford, 145 F.3d at 606. In Castellano v. New York, 142 F.3d 58 (2d Cir.1998), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 119 S.Ct. 60, 142 L.Ed.2d 47 (1998), the Second Circuit also faced the issue of whether forme......
-
Conners v. Maine Medical Center, Civ. 98-273-P-C.
...Corp., 145 F.3d 601, 604-05 (3d Cir.1998), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 119 S.Ct. 850, 142 L.Ed.2d 704 (1999); Castellano v. The City of New York, 142 F.3d 58, 67 (2d Cir.1998); Lewis v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 982 F.Supp. 1158, 1160-61 (E.D.Va.1997). Accordingly, this Court finds that disabili......
-
Disability Discrimination
...or she could not perform the essential functions of a position with the employer. Ford , 145 F.3d at 605-08; Castellano v. City of N.Y. , 142 F.3d 58, 66-69 (2nd Cir. 1998); Fletcher , 367 F.Supp.2d at 104-06 (Although former employee’s mental disability rendered her unable to perform the e......
-
Disability Discrimination
...he or she could not perform the essential functions of a position with the employer. Ford, 145 F.3d at 605-08; Castellano v. City of N.Y., 142 F.3d 58, 66-69 (2nd Cir. 1998); Fletcher, 367 F.Supp.2d at 104-06 (Although former employee’s mental disability rendered her unable to perform the e......
-
Disability Discrimination
...or she could not perform the essential functions of a position with the employer. Ford , 145 F.3d at 605-08; Castellano v. City of N.Y. , 142 F.3d 58, 66-69 (2nd Cir. 1998); Fletcher , 367 F.Supp.2d at 104-06 (Although former employee’s mental disability rendered her unable to perform the e......
-
Table of cases
...551 (Tex. 1989), §§29:5.A, 29:5.C, 29:5.D, 41:2.A.1.b Castaneda v. Partida , 430 U.S. 482 (1977), §19:2.D.2.b Castellano v. City of N.Y. , 142 F.3d 58 (2nd Cir. 1998), §21:7.H.2.b Castellano v. Fragozo , 352 F.3d 939, 942 (5th Cir. 2003), §28:6.D Castellow v. Swiftex Mfg. Corp. , 33 S.W.3d ......