From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Casselman v. Village of Lowville

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 31, 2003
2 A.D.3d 1281 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

CA 03-01004.

December 31, 2003.

Appeal from a judgment (denominated order) of Supreme Court, Jefferson County (Gilbert, J.), entered December 19, 2002, which granted the petition and annulled the determination denying petitioner's application for General Municipal Law § 207-c benefits.

HRABCHAK GEBO, P.C., WATERTOWN (MARK G. GEBO OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

ROBERT PETER BOGDAN, SACKETS HARBOR, FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT.

Before: PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., WISNER, HURLBUTT, KEHOE, AND HAYES, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed with costs.

Memorandum: Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding challenging respondent's determination to deny his application for benefits under General Municipal Law § 207-c on the ground that petitioner's injury was not "incurred in the performance of special work related to the nature of heightened risks and duties" of police work ( Balcerak v. County of Nassau, 94 N.Y.2d 253, 259). Supreme Court properly granted the petition and annulled the determination. "[I]n order to be eligible for section 207-c benefits, a covered municipal employee need only prove a `direct causal relationship between job duties and the resulting illness or injury'" ( Matter of Theroux v. Reilly, 1 N.Y.3d 232, 243-244). Petitioner proved such a direct causal relationship and thus demonstrated his entitlement to benefits under General Municipal Law § 207-c.


Summaries of

In re Casselman v. Village of Lowville

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 31, 2003
2 A.D.3d 1281 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

In re Casselman v. Village of Lowville

Case Details

Full title:MATTER OF DAVID CASSELMAN, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT, v. VILLAGE OF LOWVILLE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Dec 31, 2003

Citations

2 A.D.3d 1281 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
768 N.Y.S.2d 890

Citing Cases

Williams v. Cnty. of Onondaga

In order to establish entitlement to General Municipal Law § 207-c benefits, petitioner must establish a…

In the Matter of Gallante v. Reilly

Those determinations were arbitrary and illegal, as it was not necessary for the petitioners to demonstrate…