Titman v. Board of Trustees of Teachers' Pension and Annuity Fund
| Decision Date | 23 October 1969 |
| Citation | 258 A.2d 31,107 N.J.Super. 244 |
| Parties | Alma Von S. TITMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF the TEACHERS' PENSION AND ANNUITY FUND, Defendant-Respondent. |
| Court | New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division |
Edward C. Stokes, Long Branch, for plaintiff (Stokes & Throckmorton, Long Branch, attorneys).
Rachel Leff, Deputy Atty. Gen., for defendant (Arthur J. Sills, Atty. Gen., attorney, Stephen Skillman, Deputy Atty. Gen., of counsel, Franklin D. Renkoff, Deputy Atty. Gen., on the brief).
Before Judges CONFORD, COLLESTER and KOLOVSKY.
Subsequent to oral argument we requested the parties to brief the question, raised for the first time at the argument by the Attorney General, whether, assuming the 1960 'jumping rope' incident qualifies as a 'traumatic event' within N.J.S.A. 18A:66--39, subd. c, plaintiff's permanent and total disability after the 1966 'staircase' incident constitutes a 'direct result' of the 1960 incident within the language and intent of the statute and under the proofs adduced before the agency.
It is clear from the fourth paragraph of subsection (c) of the cited statutory section that allowance of a pension for employment-connected disability depends upon a showing that the applicant 'is physically * * * incapacitated for the performance of duty * * *' and is 'permanently and totally disabled as a direct result of a traumatic event occurring during and as a result of the performance of his regular and assigned duties * * *.'
Plaintiff sustained a disability to her left leg in 1960 while jumping rope during a physical education class which she was teaching. We are inclined to the view, and assume for present purposes, that this constituted a 'traumatic event.' However, the proofs are persuasive that the disability resulted from the combined effect of a progressive condition of degenerative arthritis and either a ligament strain or a fracture of the bone structure of the left knee probably the product of the 1960 incident. Plaintiff had minor trouble with her left leg and favored it after the 1960 incident. However, plaintiff was not totally disabled, continuing as a teacher until September 23, 1966, when her right leg collapsed or 'snapped,' as she put it, while descending a flight of steps at school.
The medical proofs indicated that the 'process' that had caused the degeneration of the left knee also eventually affected the right knee. The school-board physician thought that plaintiff's favoring the left leg prior to the 1966 incident contributed to the collapse of the right leg.
Preliminarily, we have concluded that the Board was right in deciding that the 1966 incident was not a 'traumatic event' independently effective to sustain a claim for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gerba v. Board of Trustees of Public Emp. Retirement System
...See Russo v. Teachers' Pension and Annuity Fund, 62 N.J. 142, 151, 299 A.2d 697, 701 (1973); Titman v. Board of Trustees, TPAF, 107 N.J.Super. 244, 246, 258 A.2d 31 (App.Div.1969). These amendments were also designed to distinguish the application of the pension retirement systems from the ......
-
Russo v. Teachers' Pension and Annuity Fund
...from N.J.S.A. 43:15A--43 of the Public Employees' Retirement System statute. In Titman v. Board of Trustees of Teachers' Pension and Annuity Fund, 107 N.J.Super. 244, 246, 258 A.2d 31, 33 (App.Div.1969), the words 'traumatic event' were found to be 'a significant departure from the term 'ac......
-
Quigley v. Board of Trustees of Public Employees' Retirement System
...permanently disabled as a "direct result" of his January 17, 1983, work related accident. In Titman v. Bd. Trustees Teachers' Pens. & An. Fund, 107 N.J.Super. 244, 247, 258 A.2d 31 (App.Div.1969), which was expressly approved in Gerba, supra 83 N.J. at 186, 416 A.2d 314, we pointed out that......
-
Hillman v. Board of Trustees, Public Employees Retirement System
...been described as 'a significant departure from the term 'accident' previously found in the act.' Titman v. Board of Trustees, etc., 107 N.J.Super. 244, 246, 258 A.2d 31, 33 (App.Div.1969). That case undertook no definition of the substituted There can be no question that the Legislature, b......