Opinion
3927.
Decided June 17, 2004.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rosalyn Richter, J.), entered May 13, 2003, which denied petitioner's application to annul respondents' determination denying petitioner an accident disability pension by virtue of a tie vote of respondent Board of Trustees, and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Chester P. Lukaszewski, Syosset, for appellant.
Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel, New York (Drake A. Colley of counsel), for respondents.
Before: Buckley, P.J., Nardelli, Andrias, Williams, Gonzalez, JJ.
We cannot say as a matter of law that petitioner's disabling injury, sustained when he tripped over computer wiring in the Internal Affairs Bureau Command Center where he was assigned, was the result of an accident and not his own misstep ( see Matter of Starnella v. Bratton, 92 N.Y.2d 836, 839; Matter of Mejia v. Kerik, 301 A.D.2d 385, lv denied 100 N.Y.2d 502). Absent evidence as to the exact location of the wiring, how long it had been there and how conspicuous it was, a finding cannot be made that petitioner was unaware of the wiring, and absent such a finding, it cannot be said as a matter of law that his fall was an accident ( compare Matter of Nicholas v. Safir, 297 A.D.2d 220, lv denied 99 N.Y.2d 503, with Matter of Flannelly v. Board of Trustees, 278 A.D.2d 113). To the extent that petitioner relies on a line of duty accident that occurred 14 years earlier, it cannot be said, as matter of law, that his current disabling injuries were caused by such accident ( see Matter of Meyer v. Board of Trustees, 90 N.Y.2d 139, 145. Some credible evidence of lack of causation ( see id.) are the conservative treatment that petitioner received after the earlier accident and his return to full duty for some 14 years ( see Matter of Calzerano v. Board of Trustees, 245 A.D.2d 84).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.