From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of McNamara v. City of Syracuse

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 9, 1977
60 A.D.2d 753 (N.Y. App. Div. 1977)

Opinion

December 9, 1977

Appeal from the Onondaga Supreme Court.

Present — Moule, J.P., Cardamone, Simons, Hancock, Jr., and Denman, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated at Special Term, McLaughlin, J., and the following memorandum: We merely add that since petitioner's proceeding was one in the nature of mandamus, the period of limitations commences to run after the respondent's refusal, upon the demand of petitioner, to perform its duty and not when the determination to be reviewed becomes "final and binding" (CPLR 217). We agree with Special Term that the record as a whole supports the conclusion that petitioner's job-related accident caused or contributed to his disability in a substantial degree (see Matter of Ernest v Boggs Lake Estates, 12 N.Y.2d 414; Matter of Geremski v Department of Fire of City of Syracuse, 72 Misc.2d 166, affd 42 A.D.2d 1050, mot for lv to app den 33 N.Y.2d 521).


Summaries of

Matter of McNamara v. City of Syracuse

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 9, 1977
60 A.D.2d 753 (N.Y. App. Div. 1977)
Case details for

Matter of McNamara v. City of Syracuse

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JAMES McNAMARA, Respondent, v. CITY OF SYRACUSE, Appellant

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

Date published: Dec 9, 1977

Citations

60 A.D.2d 753 (N.Y. App. Div. 1977)

Citing Cases

Matter of Giorgio v. Bucci

While I agree with the majority that the appropriate standard of review is whether respondents'…

Matter of Dembowski v. Hanna

We agree with petitioner that respondents' determination denying his application for benefits under section…