New Jersey Public Safety Employee Lawyer & Attorney : Arpaia & Crivelli Law Firm : Police, Firefighters, Workers Compensation, Discipline Representation : New Jersey

 Since the New Jersey Supreme Court’s decision in Richardson v. Board of Trustees, Police and Firemen’s Retirement System, 192 N.J. 189 (2007), we have witnessed more denials of accidental disability applications based on the premise that the member suffered from a pre-existing illness or injury which contributed to the overall disability that prevented the member from returning to employment. However, where the scenario gets particularly interesting is when the pre-existing injury or illness was the result of a work related traumatic event. One would think that such a denial does not make sense under the Richardson decision as a “traumatic event,” as redefined by the Supreme Court,  and the resulting injuries sustained therefrom should not qualify or be viewed as a pre-existing illness or injury. Such a scenario and situation has not been addressed by New Jersey courts and is ripe for review to further flush out this new and evolving area of the law. 

 While the last paragraph may sound like a tongue twister, we will try to explain it in plain english. New Jersey courts are currently grappling with scenarios revolving around multiple injuries caused by separate traumatic events which together cause a member to be permanently disabled from performing his or her job. However, the Police and Firemen’s Retirement System, Public Employees' Retirement System and Teachers' Pension and Annuity Fund do not believe that a person with multiple injuries that occurred as the result of multiple traumatic events should be entitled to receive accidental disability benefits. As a result, the various pension funds have been disqualifying applicants with multiple injuries caused by multiple traumatic events. 

          In Richardson, the New Jersey Supreme Court revisited the “traumatic event” standard under the accidental disability retirement provision of the Police and Firemen’s Retirement System, N.J.S.A. 43:16A-1. After conducting an exhausting analysis of conflicting court decisions which interpreted the traumatic event standard differently and the legislative history of the amendments to the accidental disability statutes, the Court opined that a “traumatic event” is essentially the same as what has been historically understood as an “accident” to be. An “accident” as defined under Richardson, is an unexpected, external happening that directly causes injury and is not the result of pre-existing disease alone or in combination with work. Based on establishing this baseline definition of “accident,” the Court held that in order to obtain accidental disability benefits, a member must prove amongst other things that he or she is totally and permanently disabled as a direct result of a traumatic event that is:

1.   Identifiable as to time and place;

2.   Undesigned and unexpected; and

3.   Caused by a circumstance external to the member (not the result of pre-existing disease that is aggravated or accelerated by the work).

          The Richardson Court also provided examples of situations that satisfy the newly enunciated traumatic event standard. The first example depicted a police officer who suffers a heart attack while chasing a suspect. The Court instructed that the police officer in such a situation has not experienced a traumatic event. In that case, the work effort, alone or in combination with a pre-existing disease, was the cause of the disabling injury. However, the Court stated if that the same police officer became permanently and totally disabled during the chase solely because of a fall, the officer has suffered a traumatic event that would give rise to an award of accidental disability benefits. Thereafter, the court provided another example. A gym teacher who develops arthritis from the repetitive effects of his work over the years has not suffered a traumatic event as defined and articulated under Richardson. Such a disability is the result of degenerative disease and is not related to an event that is identifiable as to time and place. On the contrary, the same gym teacher who trips over a riser, is injured and becomes permanently and totally disabled as a result of the fall, has satisfied the accidental disability standard. 

          In sum, the Court held that a member who is injured while performing his or her ordinary duties does not disqualify him or her from receiving accidental disability benefits; some injuries sustained during the ordinary work effort will pass muster and others will not. However, the polestar of the inquiry is whether, during the regular performance of his or her job, an unexpected happening, not the result of pre-existing disease alone or in combination with the work, has occurred and directly resulted in the permanent and total disability of the member. 

In our next post, we will look further into Richardson and whether members with multiple injuries resulting from multiple traumatic events should qualify for accidental disability benefits.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

In the case of Christopher v. Board of Trustees of the Police and Firemen’s Retirement System, 33-2-0847, the appellant, a corrections officer, argued to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, that he should receive accidental disability benefits suffered from a combined psychological injury (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) that resulted from work at the world trade center post 9-11, and an assault by an inmate. Furthermore, the appellant also argued that due to the fact that his case was originally decided under the “old” evaluative standard to assess accidental disability, or the Kane [1], standard, he should be entitled to a new hearing due to the change in law that occurred in the summer of 2007 when the Richardson[2] decision was handed down by the New Jersey Supreme Court. 

The New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division heard Christopher’s argument and opined that a change in the state of the law is not ordinarily considered an adequate reason for re-opening cases in which the final administrative decision was rendered and the original time to appeal the final administrative action has expired. The bottom line is that if a member of the Police and Firemen’s Retirement System had an application for accidental disability benefits denied under the old Kane line of reasoning, and a timely appeal was not filed following the Board of Trustees Final Administrative Action, you cannot now successfully file an appeal based solely on a change in the law.  

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

On July 24, 2007, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the case of Richardson v. Board of Trustees, Police & Firemen’s Retirement System, 192 NJ 189 (2007). The case addressed a new standard to be applied by New Jersey Courts and Administrative Tribunals in awarding accidental disability retirement benefits under the provisions of various New Jersey statutes. In its decision, the Court greatly expanded the class of accidents that will entitle an employee to receive “accidental disability retirement benefits” upon being injured during employment. As a result of this decision, theoretically, many more employees will be entitled to the more extensive benefits provided under the accidental disability retirement statutes in the event of an accident or mishap in the workplace.

Prior to this decision, the test for determining whether a certain accident would qualify an individual for accidental disability retirement benefits was extremely ambiguous. In fact, many courts and practicing attorneys had a very difficult time interpreting whether a certain type of accident would entitle an individual to qualify and receive accidental disability benefits. Essentially, the determination became centered upon whether the disability was the result of a “traumatic event.” Many interpretations of this term were produced over the years, but, ultimately, courts determined that a “traumatic event” required that the cause of an injury be “a great rush of force or uncontrollable power.” As expected, this standard was very vague, restrictive, and interpreted in different ways by various judges. Consequently, courts were very inconsistent in applying this standard, thereby making it very difficult to predict which accidents would entitle an individual to accidental disability benefits. Therefore, only a limited class of employees who suffered a particular type of injury emerged as being qualified to receive these benefits.    

In response to the prior standard’s confusion and restrictiveness, the Richardson Court has now announced a new standard in awarding accidental disability benefits. Now, in order to obtain accidental disability benefits, an employee must prove that:

(1) He or she is permanently and totally disabled;

(2) That the disability is the result of a traumatic event that is;

     (a) Identifiable as to time and place;

     (b) undesigned and unexpected, and

     (c) caused by a circumstance external to the member;

(3) The traumatic event must have occurred during and as a result of the member’s regular or assigned duties;

(4) The disability was not the result of the member’s willful negligence; and

(5) The member is mentally and physically incapacitated from performing his or her usual or any other duty. 

Most importantly, this standard has eliminated the “great rush of force or uncontrollable power” requirement. Now, a traumatic injury is essentially the same as what has been understood to be an accident, an external happening that directly causes injury and is not the result of pre-existing disease alone or in combination with the work effort. Thus, any member who is injured as a direct result of an identifiable, unanticipated mishap can satisfy the traumatic event standard.

For instance, in the Richardson case, the plaintiff, a New Jersey State Correction Officer, permanently injured his wrist while trying to handcuff an unruly inmate. Under the new test, Richardson was found to have suffered a traumatic event and is now entitled to accidental disability retirement benefits. As previously stated in my last post, accidental disability benefits provide two thirds (66%) of an individual’s annual compensation benefits. On the other hand ordinary disability benefits only provide approximately forty percent (40%) of the member’s compensation. Additionally, such injuries as slip and falls can potentially be covered under the new standard, where as in the past, the injured employee would only be entitled to ordinary disability benefits. 

In summary, under the new accidental disability standard, the fact that a member is injured while performing the course of their ordinary duties will not disqualify them from receiving an accidental disability pension. Case law is still developing as to the Court’s interpretation of the Richardson decision, and how the Board of Trustees for the Police and Firemen’s Retirement System are applying the new standard to the applications they are now receiving. Based on my experience, the Board of Trustees has been inconsistent in its review of accidental disability retirement applications since Richardson. It cannot be controverted that individuals have been awarded accidental disability benefits that would have otherwise been denied under the old standard. However it also appears as if an inordinate number of applications are now being denied and thus contested under the prong that the injury must be “Identifiable as to time and place”, and that “the disability was not the result of the member’s willful negligence”. It will be interesting to follow the direction of the administrative and appellate courts in interpreting the new Richardson test and the award of accidental disability benefits.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

During the course of a public safety officer’s career, many uniformed employees become injured and disabled on the job. If a public safety officer is unable to continue his or her employment as a result of the injury, they are often left with no choice but to medically retire. The Police and Firemen’s Retirement System (PFRS), is the New Jersey public employee retirement system that services the vast majority of public safety officers in the state of New Jersey. PFRS offers two disability retirement pensions that have diverse entitlements based primarily on how the accident occurred that lead to the disabling injury. It is the Board of Trustees for PFRS that makes the determination of what type of disability pension an individual will qualify to receive. In this post, I will talk briefly about the two types of disability pensions and the benefits associated with each. In my next post, I will discuss the current state of the law as it pertains to accidental versus ordinary disability, and how the applicable pension standards are being interpreted by the Board of Trustees for PFRS and the New Jersey Courts.    

ORDINARY DISABILITY

To qualify for Ordinary Disability retirement benefits a public safety officer must:

• be a member in service at the time the application is filed with the Division of Pensions and Benefits;
• have 4 or more years of New Jersey service credit in the pension system (the purchase of out-of-state, military, and U.S. government civilian service cannot be used to attain the 4 years); and
• be considered totally and permanently disabled (the member must prove that he or she is physically or mentally incapacitated from performing the normal or assigned job duties with no possibility for significant improvement).

Ordinary Disability Retirement benefits are not reduced by any Social Security or private insurance benefits that may be payable.   However, any Workers' Compensation award receive from the accident that may have caused the disability may be reduced, or receive a “setoff”.

Ordinary Disability retirement benefits are subject to federal tax to the same extent as other pensions.

ACCIDENTAL DISABILITY

To qualify for Accidental Disability retirement benefit,s a public safety officer must:

• be a member in service at the time the application is filed with the Division of Pensions and Benefits;
• be an active member of PFRS on the date the “traumatic event” occurred that caused the injury;
• be considered totally and permanently disabled as a direct result of a” traumatic event” that happened during and as a direct result of carrying out his or her regular or assigned job duties;
• file an application within five years of the date of the traumatic event; and
• be examined by physicians selected by PFRS. Said physicians must render an opinion that the member is totally and permanently disabled as a result of the “traumatic event”.

The definition of a "Traumatic Event" has been the subject of great debate and disagreement by the New Jersey courts. This definition will be discussed in more detail in my next post.

If a public safety officer qualifies for an Accidental Disability Retirement pension, the annual benefit will be 2/3 of the annual compensation on which pension contributions were being made at the time of retirement or the date of the traumatic event, whichever provides the higher benefit.

If the Public Safety Officer is receiving periodic Workers' Compensation benefits, the Accidental Disability retirement benefits will be reduced dollar for dollar by the periodic benefits paid after the retirement date. The retirement benefit is not reduced by any Social Security or private insurance benefits that may be payable.

The Division of Pensions and Benefits reports Accidental Disability retirement benefits as exempt from federal income tax; and benefits are not subject to New Jersey State income tax until the age 65.

With the high occurrence of injury on the job, public safety officers and union leadership must make themselves familiar with the different retirement benefits in order to give proper guidance to their membership. It is often disability retirement benefits that injured public safety officers rely on to support their family members after they can no longer protect and serve.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

            Welcome to the New Jersey Public Safety Officers Law Blog. As stated in the title, this blog is dedicated to providing Corrections Officers, Police Officers, and Fire Fighters with current and relevant information regarding the laws, rules, and regulations that are particular to uniformed public safety officers throughout the state of New Jersey. Whether it be the latest interpretation of Civil Service promotional rules and regulations promulgated by the New Jersey Department of Personnel, public employee discipline decisions handed down by the Office of Administrative Law and adopted by the Merit System Board, Agency decisions issued by the New Jersey Public Employees Relations Commission, or Interest Arbitration Awards concerning collective bargaining agreements, you will find timely, interesting, and on point legal commentary here. 

            Based on the unwavering and tireless service that uniformed public safety officers provide to citizens of our state, it is only fitting that a legal forum be provided to keep officers, supervisors, and union leaders updated regarding the laws rules and regulations that effect their employment. The law firm of Arpaia & Crivelli, L.L.C. takes great pride and is sincerely grateful that we have the opportunity to routinely represent public safety officers in administrative tribunals, courts of compensation, and State and Federal courts throughout New Jersey. Providing this blog is our way of saying thank you for your service, and we will continue to protect the rights of those who protect and serve.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks