Matter of Edward Gunderson v New York City Employees' Retirement System, et al.
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
Public employee pension benefits—whether a sanitation worker’s slip-and-fall on a loose vinyl floor tile qualifies as an 'accident' for accidental disability retirement (ADR) benefits.
The Supreme Court, Kings County, upheld the New York City Employees' Retirement System (NYCERS) Board of Trustees’ denial of ADR benefits and dismissed the CPLR article 78 proceeding.
The Appellate Division reversed the Supreme Court’s judgment and annulled the NYCERS Board of Trustees’ determination denying ADR benefits, remitting for further proceedings.
Under Retirement and Social Security Law § 605-b [retirement for sanitation workers incapacitated as the natural and proximate result of an accident, not due to willful negligence, sustained in uniformed sanitation service], the record did not rationally support the finding that the event was not an 'accident.' Although the petitioner knew the floor was in general disrepair, there was no evidence he knew or should have reasonably anticipated that the vinyl tiles would shift underfoot; thus the agency’s nonaccident determination was arbitrary and capricious.
Background
On April 6, 2020, a New York City Department of Sanitation employee slipped on a loose vinyl floor tile in his assigned sanitation garage and fell on his left shoulder. He underwent three surgeries with limited improvement. The NYCERS Medical Board found him disabled and that the fall was the competent cause of disability, but concluded the event was not an 'accident' for accidental disability retirement (ADR) purposes. The NYCERS Board of Trustees adopted that recommendation and denied ADR. The petitioner brought a CPLR article 78 proceeding. The governing statute is Retirement and Social Security Law § 605-b [retirement for sanitation workers incapacitated as the natural and proximate result of an accident, not due to willful negligence, sustained in uniformed sanitation service].
Lower Court Decision
The Supreme Court, Kings County (Anne J. Swern, J.), denied the petition and, in effect, dismissed the proceeding, thereby sustaining the NYCERS Board of Trustees’ denial of ADR benefits.
Appellate Division Reversal
The Appellate Division reversed, granted the petition, annulled the NYCERS Board of Trustees’ determination, and remitted for further proceedings. The court held there was no rational, nonspeculative basis to conclude the petitioner should have anticipated the precipitating event—tiles shifting underfoot—so the incident qualified as an 'accident' under the applicable standard.
Legal Significance
Reaffirms that, under RSSL § 605-b, awareness of general workplace disrepair does not defeat ADR where the specific hazardous condition was not reasonably anticipatable. Applies the Lichtenstein definition of 'accident' and the Bodenmiller 'reasonably anticipated' standard, emphasizing that pension board determinations must rest on a rational evidentiary basis or be set aside as arbitrary and capricious.
For sanitation workers seeking ADR, a slip caused by an unexpectedly shifting floor tile can be an 'accident' when the specific hazard was not reasonably anticipated; agency denials lacking a rational, evidence-based justification will be annulled.