Steinberg v. DiNapoli

• Decision Date: 22 March 2012
• Citation: 941 N.Y.S.2d 300,93 A.D.3d 1068,2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 02153
• Parties: In the Matter of David S. STEINBERG, Petitioner, v. Thomas P. DiNAPOLI, as State Comptroller, Respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 02153
93 A.D.3d 1068
941 N.Y.S.2d 300

In the Matter of David S. STEINBERG, Petitioner,
v.
Thomas P. DiNAPOLI, as State Comptroller, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

March 22, 2012.

[941 N.Y.S.2d 301]

Barlett, McDonough & Monaghan, L.L.P., White Plains (Lynne S. Beccaro of counsel), for petitioner.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (William E. Storrs of counsel), for respondent.

Before: PETERS, J.P., ROSE, KAVANAGH, GARRY and EGAN JR., JJ.

KAVANAGH, J.

[93 A.D.3d 1068] Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent which denied petitioner's application for performance of duty disability retirement benefits.

In July 2007, petitioner, a former correction officer with the Westchester County Department of Corrections, filed an application for performance of duty disability retirement benefits, claiming that he was permanently disabled as a result of lower back injuries sustained during a November 2006 altercation with a prison inmate. Although the New York State and Local Retirement System found that petitioner was permanently incapacitated from the performance of his duties, it nonetheless denied his application upon the ground that his disability was not the natural and proximate result of an incident sustained in service. Consequently, petitioner sought a hearing and redetermination, following which a Hearing Officer again denied his application. Respondent, adding

[941 N.Y.S.2d 302]

only a supplemental conclusion of law, adopted the Hearing Officer's findings, and petitioner subsequently commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding.

We confirm. “In order to be entitled to performance of duty disability retirement benefits, petitioner bore the burden of demonstrating that he was incapacitated from the performance [93 A.D.3d 1069] of duty as the natural and proximate result of [a] ... disability sustained in service” ( Matter of Monachelli v. DiNapoli, 84 A.D.3d 1687, 1688, 924 N.Y.S.2d 597 [2011], lv. denied 18 N.Y.3d 802, 2011 WL 6350560 [2011] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted] ). While, among other things, the medical report from one of petitioner's physicians indicated that petitioner's permanent disability stemmed largely from the November 2006 incident, respondent relied upon the contrary conclusions contained in the reports from John Mazella, the...