Lamb v. DiNapoli

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent Comptroller denying petitioner’s application for accidental disability retirement benefits.

Petitioner, a police officer with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey for 28 years, applied for accidental disability retirement benefits following a slip and fall in a stairwell on May 23, 2012, contending that he permanently injured his left knee. Following a hearing, a Hearing Officer denied the application upon the ground that the incident did not constitute an accident within the meaning of Retirement and Social Security Law § 363. Respondent Comptroller adopted the Hearing Officer’s findings and conclusions, prompting petitioner to commence this CPLR article 78 proceeding.

We confirm. For purposes of the Retirement and Social

Petitioner testified that, on the day in question, he was working his regular assignment patrolling the lower level toll booth lanes on the George Washington Bridge when, while descending stairs returning from a break, he slipped on the landing of a stairwell in the administrative building. Traversing this employee staircase was a routine part of petitioner’s police patrol duties, as he testified that he used the stairwell multiple times every day during his shift. In the contemporaneous incident report prepared by a police sergeant, petitioner reported that he had slipped on a “wet spot” and the weather conditions were described as “on and off rain.” At the hearing, however, petitioner testified that he had no recollection of the weather conditions that day and described the surface where he had slipped as a “large puddle,” two to three feet wide, which he claimed was not observable as it blended with the similarly-colored floor surface. The Comptroller discredited petitioner’s testimony to the extent that it was inconsistent with the incident report, given his ability to observe the weather conditions at length that day while working outside, and concluded that a large puddle would have been readily observable. Notably, the assessment of credibility and resolution of apparent conflicting evidence was for the Comptroller to resolve (see Matter of Messina v New York State & Local Employees’ Retirement Sys., 102 AD3d 1068 , 1069 [2013], lv denied 21 NY3d 855 [2013]). Given that the incident occurred during the performance of routine employment duties, that petitioner could have reasonably anticipated that the stairs would be wet and slippery on a rainy day, and that the fall resulted from petitioner’s

McCarthy, Devine, Clark and Mulvey, JJ., concur.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.