Matter of Whipple v. New York State & Local Ret. Sys., 126 A.D.3d 1282 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015). · Go Syfert
Matter of Whipple v. New York State & Local Ret. Sys., 126 A.D.3d 1282 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
10 citation events (10 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Matter of Mallay v. New York State Comptroller (nyappdiv, 2023-10-12)
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Mallay v. New York State Comptroller
N.Y. App. Div. · 2023 · confidence medium
"Where substantial evidence supports [the Comptroller's] decision, it will not be disturbed" ( Matter of Whipple v New York State & Local Retirement Sys. , 126 AD3d 1282, 1283 [3d Dept 2015] [citation omitted], lv denied 26 NY3d 912 [2015]; accord Matter of Lenci v DiNapoli , 210 AD3d 1224 , 1226 [3d Dept 2022]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Lenci v. DiNapoli (2×)
N.Y. App. Div. · 2022 · confidence medium
"Nevertheless, to be eligible for accidental disability retirement benefits, petitioner's incapacitation must be the natural and proximate result of an accident sustained while in service" ( Matter of Whipple v New York State & Local Retirement Sys. , 126 AD3d 1282, 1283 [3d Dept 2015] [internal quotation marks, brackets and citations omitted], lv denied 26 NY3d 912 [2015]; see Retirement and Social Security Law § 363 [a] [1]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Arroyo v. DiNapoli
N.Y. App. Div. · 2021 · confidence medium
Respondent adopted the Hearing Officer's findings of fact and conclusions of law, and petitioner thereafter commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge respondent's determination. [FN1] "In order to be entitled to accidental disability retirement benefits, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate that his or her incapacitation was the natural and proximate result of an accident sustained while in service" ( Matter of Gilden v DiNapoli , 183 AD3d 1100 , 1101-1102 [2020] [internal quotation marks, ellipses, brackets and citations omitted]; see Retirement and Social Security Law �…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Matter of Chomicki v. Nitido
N.Y. App. Div. · 2016 · confidence medium
We confirm. “[T]o be eligible for accidental disability retirement benefits, petitioner’s incapacitation must be the natural and proximate result of an accident sustained while in service” (Matter of Whipple v New York State & Local Retirement Sys., 126 AD3d 1282, 1283 [2015] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted], lv denied 26 NY3d 912 [2015]).
discussed Cited "see" Matter of Mozdziak v. DiNapoli
N.Y. App. Div. · 2024 · signal: see · confidence high
Under the Retirement and Social Security Law, "[t]o be entitled to either accidental or performance of duty disability retirement benefits, petitioner bore the burden of establishing that his incapacitation from the performance of his duties was 'the natural and proximate result' of an accident or a disability that was 'sustained in such service' " ( Matter of Verille v Gardner , 177 AD3d 1068 , 1069 [3d Dept 2019], quoting Retirement and Social Security Law §§ 363 [a] [1]; 363-c [b] [1]; see Matter of Whipple v New York State & Local Retirement Sys. , 126 AD3d 1282, 1283 [3d Dept 2015], lv …
discussed Cited "see" Matter of Verille v. Gardner
N.Y. App. Div. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high
To be entitled to either accidental or performance of duty disability retirement benefits, petitioner bore the burden of establishing that his incapacitation from the performance of his duties was "the natural and proximate result" of an accident or a disability that was "sustained in such service" (Retirement and Social Security Law §§ 363 [a] [1]; 363-c [b] [1]; see Matter of Whipple v New York State & Local Retirement Sys. , 126 AD3d 1282, 1283 [2015], lv denied 26 NY3d 912 [2015]; Matter of Mendez v DiNapoli , 92 AD3d 1075, 1076 [2012]).
discussed Cited "see" Matter of Hanon v. DiNapoli
N.Y. App. Div. · 2019 · signal: see · confidence high
Initially, "[t]o be eligible for accidental disability retirement benefits, [a] petitioner's incapacitation must be the natural and proximate result of an accident sustained while in service" ( Matter of Chomicki v Nitido , 145 AD3d 1337, 1338 [2016] [internal quotation marks, brackets and citation omitted]; see Matter of Whipple v New York State & Local Retirement Sys. , 126 AD3d 1282, 1283 [2015], lv denied 26 NY3d 912 [2015]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of William A. Whipple, Petitioner,
v.
New York State and Local Retirement System Et Al., Respondents
519373.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Mar 26, 2015.
126 A.D.3d 1282
McCarthy, Egan, Devine, Clark.
Cited by 7 opinions  |  Published
McCarthy, J.P.

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 Comptroller which denied petitioner’s application for accidental disability retirement benefits.

Petitioner, a highway maintenance worker for the Depart[*1283] ment of Transportation, was involved in a work-related accident on April 11, 2005 when sand was dropped on his head. In 2007, petitioner applied for accidental disability retirement benefits, asserting that he was permanently incapacitated as a result of the injuries sustained in the workplace accident. Following a hearing, the Hearing Officer ruled that petitioner failed to establish that the disability resulted from the accident. Respondent Comptroller (hereinafter respondent) accepted the findings and conclusions of the Hearing Officer and denied petitioner’s application. This CPLR article 78 proceeding ensued.

We confirm. There is no dispute that the April 11, 2005 incident was an accident and that petitioner is permanently incapacitated from the performance of his duties. Nevertheless, “[t]o be eligible for accidental disability retirement benefits, petitioner’s incapacitation must be ‘the natural and proximate result of an accident’ sustained while in service” (Matter of Shea v DiNapoli, 115 AD3d 1023, 1024 [2014], quoting Retirement and Social Security Law § 363 [a] [1]). Where substantial evidence supports respondent’s decision, it will not be disturbed (see Matter of Messina v New York State & Local Employees’ Retirement Sys., 102 AD3d 1068, 1068 [2013], lv denied 21 NY3d 855 [2013]).

Here, Patrick Connolly, an orthopedic surgeon who examined petitioner and reviewed his medical records, opined that the accident was an aggravation of a long-standing preexisting degenerative condition that resolved, as evidenced by his ability to return to work. Connolly referred to the X-ray and MRI reports that noted no acute injury from the accident but, rather, degenerative findings that occur over time. Furthermore, petitioner’s medical records indicated, and petitioner’s testimony confirmed, that he had a history of neck pain and hand numbness beginning in the 1980s. Under these circumstances, Connolly presented a rational and fact-based medical opinion based upon medical records, examination of petitioner and petitioner’s work history. Although there is medical evidence to support a contrary conclusion, respondent’s determination to deny accidental disability benefits is supported by substantial evidence and, therefore, it will not be disturbed (see Matter of Ortiz v DiNapoli, 98 AD3d 1224, 1225 [2012]; Matter of Murray v DiNapoli, 79 AD3d 1412, 1413-1414 [2010]).

We have reviewed petitioner’s remaining contentions, including the consideration of certain witness statements relating to the accident, and find them to be without merit.

Egan Jr., Devine and Clark, JJ., concur.

Adjudged that the[*1284] determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.