Posted by Sherman Federman Sambur McIntyre
Sherman Federman Sambur McIntyre
Super User has not set their biography yet
User is currently offline
on Monday, 11 June 2012 in Workers' Compensation

By:  Sean Patrick Riordan, Esq.  |  Sherman, Federman, Sambur & McIntyre, LLP.

    It is unmistakable that municipal pensions have been under attack for several years. It is no secret that several elected officials have taken aim at the defined benefit plans paid by city and state pension systems. Various media sources have also sought to turn public opinion on the pension issue, running story after story on the "need" for pension reform and the "positive attributes" of defined contribution plans. While this article isn't meant to tackle this hotly debated topic, the impact that the general public discourse has had on disability systems cannot be ignored.

    Newspaper articles regarding disability recipients daily activities have graced occasional front pages, missing the ultimate point of whether the individual's impairments prevent their ability to perform the full duties required of their job. Despite the articles' inaccurate consideration of the proper legal standard of analysis, pension system's responses have been clear; even legitimately disabled workers can and will be denied their disability pensions.

    With greater denial at the application stage many workers will now be faced with the difficult decision of whether to proceed to an Article 78 appeal and ask a Supreme Court Judge to overrule the decision of the pension system. Why is the decision so difficult? Because a number of factors must be weighed, and weighed competently.

    First, courts have traditionally been reluctant to overturn the decisions of administrative agencies. The law generally holds the administrative agency to be in the best position to make decisions within its specialty and therefore gives deference to its determinations. Article 78 proceedings reflect this deference by placing a very high burden on petitioners (the worker) in trying to overturn an agency decision. To win an Article 78 the worker must show (1) that the agency determination contained an error of law, or (2) was arbitrary or capricious, or (3) was an abuse of discretion. While this may sound simple enough, this high standard makes these cases very difficult to win.

    Another important factor to consider is the type of denial you may have received.  The pension board may deny an Accidental Disability Retirement ("ADR") application for three reasons, (1) You are not permanently incapacitated from your full duties and responsibilities, or (2) you were not injured due to an "accident", or (3) your disability is not due to your on the job accident, this is generally called a "causal relationship" finding.  How your application was denied will assist in determining what direction your case will proceed.

    Whether you sustained an on the job "accident" is something that you should seek counsel about. While the courts have defined what an "accident" means, "a sudden, fortuitous mischance, outside the risks of one's duties and injurious in impact", retirement systems have been far less definitive on what scenarios actually meet this definition. To say the law surrounding what constitutes an "accident" is fuzzy is an understatement. However, some occurrences are simply not accidents under the law and competent legal counsel can guide you on whether or not to pursue a denial on this ground. If you have a sound basis for believing that an occurrence is an accident however, this is the best way to win an Article 78 appeal.

    Permanent incapacity and causality are issues that are much more difficult to win at the Article 78 phase. The courts have made clear, they will not substitute their own opinion for that of the Medical Board or the Board of Trustees. In permanency cases this means that even if multiple medical opinions state that you are permanently incapacitated from the job, as long as the Medical Board bases its decision on "some credible evidence and is not irrational," its determination will be upheld. Credible evidence has been defined as "evidence that proceeds from a credible source and reasonably tends to support the proposition for which it is offered." This means, simply put, a Medical Board's examination and subsequent opinion regarding permanent incapacity is almost, by itself, "credible evidence." This simple fact makes appealing the Medical Board's negative determination on permanence almost fruitless.

    I say "almost fruitless" because over the past several years the courts have handed down several decisions which have found the Medical Board's determination to lack "credible evidence." The basis for the majority of these decisions point to the various Medical Boards' conclusory opinions and lack of articulation in its findings.  For instance, a recent Supreme Court, Kings County decision stated:

"the Medical Board must do more than simply identify reports and tests and state its conclusion; it must address the evidence before it and explain why the evidence it discounts is not valid, and why the evidence it relies upon is more persuasive, explaining why the opinions and diagnoses that are relied upon are incorrect."  

    As the Medical Boards continue to resort to simply stating conclusory findings without articulation of its rationale Article 78's remain a viable option for those that have been found not permanently incapacitated. Where substantial medical evidence exists that an individual is permanently incapacitated and the Medical Board fails to properly analyze the medical evidence before it, the courts will continue to overturn the permanent incapacity decisions.   

    Courts are equally reluctant to overturn "causality" decisions made by a Board of Trustees and will not substitute its theory of causality for that made by the Board. Frequently the best way to win cases in this area is by claiming "error of law." Where the  Medical Board finds that "degenerative conditions" or "pre-existing conditions" are the cause of the worker's permanent incapacity they must also consider whether a subsequent on the job accident "permanently aggravated or exacerbated the underlying dormant condition." This means that even when an individual has an underlying medical condition, if such individual sustains an on-the-job accident which makes that condition disabling, the accident is the cause of the disability. This is a legal burden that many pension boards do not address when making causality decision and can be a viable avenue for appeal.  

    Additionally, "presumptive bills" regarding the World Trade Center, heart bills and lung bills require the pension system to rebut causality, placing the burden on the pension system to disprove that the job caused such impairments. Frequently the system fails to meet its legal burden in this area.

    Two final factors should be considered in determining whether to proceed with an Article 78 appeal. First, and what many litigants do not understand, is that courts have the right to "reverse" or "remand" a decision. In cases where permanent incapacity and causality, it is infrequent that a court will reverse the findings of the agency. This is because the court would have to find "as a matter of law" that an individual is disabled from full duty or that a particular occurrence is the cause of the disability. This leads to many of the decisions being "remanded" to the pension system for further processing. In this scenario a "win" merely allows the individual the ability to again be heard before the pension board, an outcome that not all are happy with.

    Lastly, Article 78's can be very expensive endeavors. From legal fees (which sometimes are exorbitant)  to filing fees and binding requirements, Article 78 appeals can run into thousands of dollars of expenses. Far to many cases with unrealistic opportunity of success are taken up to Article 78 appeal, wasting the individuals money and creating bad case law for all. Before you jump into an Article 78, have a frank and realistic conversation with your attorney about the possibilities of success.

    As always, if you have any questions about Article 78's, or any questions regarding your disability rights, please do not hesitate to contact Sherman, Federman, Sambur, & McIntyre at (866) 557-7500.

Tags: Untagged


Please login first in order for you to submit comments

Additional Information Relative to Filing a Worker's Compensation Claim - English

Sherman, Federman, Sambur, & McInture, LLP is a Long Island, NY based workers’ compensation firm. We provide services to the greater New York area including but not limited to Brentwood, Garden City, Hempstead, Islip, Manhattan, Riverhead, essentially all of Long Island (Nassau and Suffolk county), Sysosset, Bay Shore, Hampton Bays, East Hampton, West Hampton, the North Fork, New Jersey, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Massacheusetts the South Fork, Down Island, the North Shore, the South Shore, Mattituck, Jamesport, Cutchogue, Commack, Wyndanch, Longbeach, Queens, the Bronx, Brooklyn, etc. We cover all urban, suburban and rural areas alike (i.e., the entire Tristate area).

Services include workers accident, workers compensation, social security disability, and veterans disability. We have worked with and represent heart attack patients, herniated discs, those injured on the job, pertaining to occupational disease illness for bread winners, the elderly/old, exclusive remedy requires, death benefits, fraud, office related injury, posttraumatic stress syndrome, abogado, lesions, compensation, laborales, en mass, section 32, HEP C, hepatitis, permanent disability, pre-existing conditions, 3rd party injuries, neck injury, sue worthy, employer induced, 32 settlements, WCB permanent-partial, carpal tunnel, car crash, arthritis, CRPS, temporary partial, TPD, complex regional pain syndrome, etc.

We are the best law attorneys/work injury lawyers/SSI and SSD attorneys, located in New York City. We can provide a free consultation for your case. Simply fill out our NY state intake form. There is also a printable version available via that same new client intake form link.

Where can I file a workers comp, SSD (social security disability), veterans claim in New York? Please contact us to set up an appointment!

Please view our testimonials above via the top-most navigation menu. You may also view our frequently asked questions (FAQ) pertaining to your SSI/SSD/Worker's Comp claim.

Moreover, please contact us with any questions related to: withdrawal, workers comp forms relative to NY/NJ/CT, NY workers compensation laws, Suffolk County and Nassau County WC Laws, questions regarding doctors in Long Island who may be able to assist with your comp case, "When should I get an attorney for NYS WC case?", filing for benefits, repetitive motion, all WC related forms and, potential fees and awards for your case, questions related to the WC board, questions relative to changing your reward, average weekly wage, reopening a workman’s comp case, SSI Attorneys and assistance, questions regarding making/filing another application whilst you have a pending appeal, reopening post-decision cases, voluntary withdrawal from the workforce, "Who pays for workers comp?", judge(s), spine stimulators, how to begin your WC case with SFSM via, wages and wage estimates, claiming your rewards for a filed case and the respective guidelines to winning.

Regardless of the outcome, Sherman, Federman, Sambur, & McIntyre, LLP is here to help. And our success is driven by our combined passion to help you!

El pariente adicional de Información para Archivar una Pretensión de Indemnización Laboral - Espanol

Sherman, Federman, Sambur, y McInture, LLP es una Larga Isla, Nueva York basó a la firma de compensación por accidentes de trabajo. Le proveemos los servicios al mayor área de Nueva York incluyendo pero no limitado a Brentwood, la Ciudad Jardín, Hempstead, Islip, Manhattan, Fuente de Un Río, esencialmente todo Sysosset Bastante Isleño,, Costa Baya, Hampton Bays, Hampton del este, West Hampton, el North Fork, Nueva Jersey, Connecticut, Pensilvania, Massacheusetts lo Al Sur Tenedor, la Isla Caída, el North Shore, lo Al Sur Costa, Mattituck, Jamesport, Cutchogue, Commack, Wyndanch, Longbeach, las Reinas, el Bronx, Brooklyn, etcétera (Nassau y condado Suffolk). Cubrimos todas áreas urbanas, suburbanas y rurales por igual (i.e., el área entero Tristate).

Los servicios incluyen accidente de trabajadores, compensación de trabajadores, incapacidad de seguro social, e incapacidad de veteranos. Hemos trabajado con y representamos a los pacientes de ataque al corazón, los discos herniados, esos heridos en el trabajo, relacionado con la enfermedad de enfermedad profesional para ganadores de pan, las personas de edad/viejas, el recurso exclusivo requiere, beneficios por muerte, fraude, la oficina relató lesión, síndrome postraumático de estrés, abogado, lesiones, compensación, laborales, masa en, sección 32, HEP C, la hepatitis, la incapacidad perpetua, condiciones preexistentes, lesiones 3 de fiesta, la lesión del cuello, entable demanda digno, el empleador inducido, 32 acuerdos, WCB parcial en la permanente, el túnel del carpo, el accidente automovilístico, la artritis, CRPS, el empleado eventual parcial, TPD, complique síndrome regional de dolor, etcétera.

Somos los abogados de ley de mejor abogado /trabajo de la lesión del abogado /Ingreso Suplementario de Seguridad y SSD, localizado en la ciudad de Nueva York. Podemos proveer una consulta libre para su caso. Simplemente llene nuestra forma de la toma del estado de Nueva York. Hay también una versión imprimible disponible por ese mismo nuevo enlace de la forma de la toma del cliente.

¿Dónde puedo reportar a unos trabajadores comp, SSD (la incapacidad de seguro social), pretensión de veteranos en Nueva York? Aquí mismo en Sherman, Federman.

Por favor mire nuestros testimonios arriba por el menú que se sobrepasa más de navegación. Usted también puede mirar nuestras preguntas preguntadas (el archivo de preguntas frecuentes) frecuentemente relacionado con su la pretensión Comp DE SSI/SSD/Worker.

Además, por favor contáctenos con cualquier preguntas con las que se relacionó: El retiro, ¿ las formas del comp de trabajadores referente a NY?, Solicitando beneficios, moción repetitiva, todo WC formas relacionadas y, premios y retribuciones potenciales para su caso, las preguntas se relacionaron con el pizarrón WC, preguntas referente a cambiar su recompensa, salario medio semanal, reabriendo un trabajador Abogados comp de caso, de Ingreso Suplementario de Seguridad y la asistencia, tiene objeciones acerca de referente a la confección /limadura otra aplicación aun mientras usted tiene una súplica pendiente, reabriendo casos de postdecisión, retiro voluntario de la población en edad laboral, ¿ "quien paga para trabajadores comp"?, El juez (s), los estimuladores de la columna vertebral, cómo empezar su caso WC con SFSM por medio de, sueldo y salario estima, pidiendo sus recompensas como demanda por un caso archivado y el respectivo conjunto de directrices a ganar.

Sin tener en cuenta el resultado, Sherman, Federman, Sambur, y McIntyre, LLP es aquí para ayudar. ¡Y nuestro éxito es conducido por nuestra pasión combinada para ayudarle!