Matter of Smiley v. Whinnery

Summary

The Appellate Division, Second Department, held that the Medical Board's determination denying performance-of-duty disability retirement benefits based on the petitioner's physical conditions was arbitrary and capricious because it lacked credible evidentiary support and failed to address medical evidence in light of the FDNY paramedic job description. The court affirmed annulment of the determination but modified the judgment to deny attorneys' fees because no agreement, statute, or court rule authorized such an award.

Holdings

1. The Medical Board's determination that Smiley's sinusitis was not sufficiently severe to prevent him from performing the duties of an FDNY paramedic was arbitrary and capricious because it was unsupported by credible evidence and failed to consider relevant medical evidence in light of the revised paramedic job description.
2. The Supreme Court properly annulled the Board of Trustees' November 30, 2020 determination and directed NYCERS to retire Smiley with performance-of-duty disability benefits based on his World Trade Center-related qualifying physical condition.
3. The Supreme Court erred in awarding attorney fees because no agreement, statute, or court rule authorized such an award.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Medical Board's determination that Smiley's sinusitis and other physical conditions did not disable him from performing the actual duties of an FDNY paramedic was arbitrary and capricious and unsupported by credible evidence.
2. Whether the Supreme Court properly annulled the Board of Trustees' determination and directed NYCERS to award performance-of-duty disability retirement benefits based on a qualifying World Trade Center-related physical condition.
3. Whether the Supreme Court had a legal basis to award Smiley attorney fees in the CPLR article 78 proceeding.

Disposition

affirmed