Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: Stanley JEFFERSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Raymond KELLY, as the Police Commissioner of the City of New York, and as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Police Pension Fund, Article II, et al., Respondents-Respondents.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Lottie E. Wilkins, J.), entered December 11, 2006, dismissing this proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 seeking to annul respondent Commissioner's determination denying accidental disability retirement benefits, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The court properly declined to annul respondent's determination and remand for reconsideration on the issue of the claimed causal connection between petitioner's psychiatric disability and his alleged line-of-duty injury. Credible evidence rebuts the World Trade Center presumption (Administrative Code of City of N.Y. § 13-252.1[1][a] ), assuming it applies (see Matter of Mulet v. Kelly, 49 A.D.3d 336, 852 N.Y.S.2d 762 [2008] ), and supports the Medical Board's determination that petitioner's disability was not the natural and proximate result of a line-of-duty 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, 659 N.Y.S.2d 215, 681 N.E.2d 382 [1997] ). Inasmuch as the challenged determination is rationally based, is not arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion or contrary to law, and the record before us does not support, as a matter of law, petitioner's theory of causation, we are obliged to affirm (Matter of Picciurro v. Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Police Pension Fund, Art. II, 46 A.D.3d 346, 348, 847 N.Y.S.2d 553 [2007] ).
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: May 20, 2008
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)