Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996

Segura v. City of Long Beach

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided August 12, 1996 · Bracken, Copertino, Krausman, Miller

230 A.D.2d 799; 646 N.Y.S.2d 823; 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8378

Cases that cite this one

10 later published cases cite this decision.

Matter of Delgrande v. Greenville Fire Dist. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
Matter of McLaughlin v. County of Rockland (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2024)
Matter of Rockland County Sheriff's Deputies Assn. v. County of Rockland (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
Matter of Delgrande v. Greenville Fire Dist. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
Solano v. City of Mount Vernon (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
Solano v. City of Mount Vernon (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
Miserendino v. City of Mount Vernon (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
Miserendino v. City of Mount Vernon (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
Kahl v. County of Nassau (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
Pirrone v. Town of Wallkill (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

—Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent City of Long Beach Fire Department, dated December 27, 1994, which, after a hearing, found that the petitioner’s injuries were not caused by his service to the City of Long Beach.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.

*800Contrary to the petitioner’s contention, a firefighter who qualifies for a disability retirement pension is not automati- . cally entitled to the benefits of General Municipal Law § 207-a (see, Matter of Sutka v Conners, 73 NY2d 395; Matter of Flynn v Zaleski, 212 AD2d 706). Here, where the State Comptroller did not determine that the petitioner’s injury was caused as a result of the performance of his duties, the respondents were entitled to independently consider the cause of the petitioner’s injury in determining the petitioner’s entitlement to benefits under General Municipal Law § 207-a (see, Matter of Flynn v Zaleski, supra). Since there was conflicting medical evidence as to the cause of the petitioner’s injury, the respondents were free to credit one physician’s testimony over that of the other physician (see, Matter of Flynn v Zaleski, supra; Matter of Newell v Regan, 202 AD2d 771, 772). We find no reason to disturb their determination.

We have examined the petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Bracken, J. P., Miller, Copertino and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.