From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chacon v. O'Neill

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Aug 20, 2019
175 A.D.3d 426 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Opinion

9304 Index 101644/16

08-20-2019

In re Aura CHACON, Petitioner–Respondent, v. James O'NEILL, etc., et al., Respondents–Appellants.

Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Ellen Ravitch of counsel), for appellants. Chester Lukaszewski, P.C., Garden City (Chester Lukaszewski of counsel), for respondent.


Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Ellen Ravitch of counsel), for appellants.

Chester Lukaszewski, P.C., Garden City (Chester Lukaszewski of counsel), for respondent.

Richter, J.P., Manzanet–Daniels, Webber, Kern, JJ.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles E. Ramos, J.), entered August 25, 2017, annulling the determination of respondent Board of Trustees, dated June 8, 2016, which denied petitioner's application for accidental disability retirement, and remanding the matter to the Board, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the petition denied, and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 dismissed.

Because the Board of Trustees's denial of petitioner's application for accident disability retirement was the result of a tie vote, the issue for the reviewing court was whether there was any credible evidence of lack of causation, i.e., evidence that the disability was not the natural and proximate result of the 1996 service-related accident (see Matter of Meyer v. Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1–B Pension Fund, 90 N.Y.2d 139, 144–145, 659 N.Y.S.2d 215, 681 N.E.2d 382 [1997] ; Matter of Baudille v. Kelly, 95 A.D.3d 415, 415, 942 N.Y.S.2d 865 [1st Dept. 2012] ). In this record there is some credible evidence of lack of causation, namely, the conservative treatment petitioner received after the accident and petitioner's return to full duty for approximately 14 years before seeking further treatment (see Matter of Doyle v. Kelly, 8 A.D.3d 125, 779 N.Y.S.2d 32 [1st Dept. 2004] ; Matter of Baudille, 95 A.D.3d 415, 942 N.Y.S.2d 865 ). Moreover, neither the Medical Board nor petitioner's physician were able to explain why the purported disabling injury did not prevent her from returning to full time duty for 14 years without further complaint.


Summaries of

Chacon v. O'Neill

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Aug 20, 2019
175 A.D.3d 426 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
Case details for

Chacon v. O'Neill

Case Details

Full title:In re Aura Chacon, Petitioner-Respondent, v. James O'Neill, etc., et al.…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Aug 20, 2019

Citations

175 A.D.3d 426 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 6151
104 N.Y.S.3d 894

Citing Cases

Trager v. N.Y. State Comptroller

Although petitioner challenges the sufficiency of the medical evidence, Habacker "provided a rational,…

Shank v. Shea

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Arthur F. Engoron, J.), entered on or about June 30, 2021, denying…