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: Daniel GALLANTE, et al., appellants, v. Edward REILLY, etc., et al., respondents.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review six determinations of the Nassau County Sheriff's Department dated May 25, 2001, May 29, 2001, June 11, 2001, June 11, 2001, June 27, 2001, and August 31, 2001, respectively, denying the petitioners benefits pursuant to General Municipal Law § 207-c, the petitioners appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burke, J.) dated February 22, 2002, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.
ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, and that the petition is granted to the extent that the determinations are annulled, and that the matters are remitted to the Nassau County Sheriff's Department for new determinations.
The petitioners' requests for benefits under General Municipal Law § 207-c were denied because the injuries they incurred did not result from any heightened risk associated with their duties as corrections officers. Those determinations were arbitrary and illegal, as it was not necessary for the petitioners to demonstrate that any such heightened risk was a critical factor in the occurrence of the accident (see Matter of Theroux v. Reilly, 1 N.Y.3d 232, 771 N.Y.S.2d 43, 803 N.E.2d 364).
However, the petitioners were still required to demonstrate that there was a “direct causal relationship between job duties and the resulting illness or inju[ries]” (Matter of Theroux v. Reilly, supra at 244, 771 N.Y.S.2d 43, 803 N.E.2d 364, quoting Matter of White v. County of Cortland, 97 N.Y.2d 336, 340, 740 N.Y.S.2d 288, 766 N.E.2d 950; see also Matter of Casselman v. Village of Lowville, 2 A.D.3d 1281, 768 N.Y.S.2d 890). In light of the significant body of recent Appellate Division case law that was overruled as a result of the Court of Appeals' decision in Matter of Theroux v. Reilly, supra, (overruling Matter of Wagman v. Kapica, 300 A.D.2d 406, 751 N.Y.S.2d 754; Matter of Clements v. Panzarella, 297 A.D.2d 4, 746 N.Y.S.2d 495; Youngs v. Village of Penn Yan, 291 A.D.2d 852, 737 N.Y.S.2d 186; Matter of Travison v. County of Albany, 291 A.D.2d 705, 739 N.Y.S.2d 204; Matter of Sutherland v. Village of Suffern, 289 A.D.2d 582, 735 N.Y.S.2d 605), the respondent Nassau County Sheriff's Department should be afforded an opportunity to review the petitioners' applications for benefits under General Municipal Law § 207-c in accordance with the new standard announced by the Court of Appeals in Matter of Theroux v. Reilly, supra.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: May 10, 2004
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)