From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Ortiz v. N.Y. City Employees'

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 9, 1991
173 A.D.2d 237 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Summary

tripping on an elevator gate not unexpected or sudden for an elevator mechanic

Summary of this case from In Matter of Brenes v. Kelly

Opinion

May 9, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Kenneth Shorter, J.).


Petitioner, while employed as an elevator mechanic with the New York City Housing Authority, sustained a disabling injury to his left knee when he attempted to step down from the top of an elevator car which he was repairing, caught his left foot in the elevator door's gate-chain, and fell two to three feet to the floor below. In his disability retirement application, petitioner stated that he was not performing any unusual work when the accident occurred.

On appeal, petitioner argues his knee injury was proximately caused by his unexpected fall, and thus, that he is entitled to accidental disability pension benefits as a matter of law. We disagree. The nature of the occurrence was reasonably within the risk of the work performed and, as such, it cannot be construed as a sudden and unexpected event, which is a prerequisite to a grant of accident disability pension benefits (see, e.g., Matter of Pratt v Regan, 68 N.Y.2d 746).

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Asch, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

Matter of Ortiz v. N.Y. City Employees'

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 9, 1991
173 A.D.2d 237 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

tripping on an elevator gate not unexpected or sudden for an elevator mechanic

Summary of this case from In Matter of Brenes v. Kelly

tripping on an elevator gate not unexpected or sudden for an elevator mechanic

Summary of this case from In re Application of Brenes v. Kelly
Case details for

Matter of Ortiz v. N.Y. City Employees'

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of RAYMOND ORTIZ, Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY EMPLOYEES…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: May 9, 1991

Citations

173 A.D.2d 237 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
569 N.Y.S.2d 446

Citing Cases

Pastalove v. Kelly

ordinary employment duties, considered in view of the particular employment in question, is not an accidental…

Matter of Ortiz v. New York City Employees' Retirement

Decided November 26, 1991 Appeal from (1st Dept: 173 A.D.2d 237) MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL GRANTED OR…