Dedicated to Corrections Officers, Policemen, & Firemen throughout the Garden State
As reported in the Star Ledger on October 26, 2010, Governor Chris Christie joined with the Democratic Essex County Executive, Joe DiVincenzo, to stop a legislative effort to water down his proposal to cap public employee raises.
Democratic lawmakers were trying to pass a bill that would have allowed exceptions to Christie’s proposal for…
As reported in the Trentonian on October 19, 2010, New Jersey lawmakers failed to reach an agreement with the Governor’s office over how to ensure that police and firefighters’ raises are based on economic conditions in the towns where they work without trampling on their right to negotiate contracts.
Governor Chris Christie has been …
As reported in the Trentonian on October 15, 2010, a battle is brewing at the Statehouse over whether to cap salary increases for public employees who cannot strike. Various mayors want arbitration-awarded salary and benefits increases for police and firefighters capped at 2 percent to help them control property taxes, but union officials say …
As reported in the Trentonian on October 13, 2010, the Ewing Township Police Department has slashed the number of tickets for motor vehicle violations in the past three months in response to the Township’s decision to lay off six patrol officers due to budget constraints.
According to Police Chief Robert Coulton, summons issued …
On September 28, 2010, the Appellate Division decided In the Matter of Manuel Oliveira, Docket No.: A-3325-08T2. In the case, Manuel Oliveira appealed from a final decision of the Civil Service Commission (“Commission”) denying his application for back pay and counsel fees.
Oliveira is a Senior Corrections Officer with the Department of Corrections (“DOC”), …
On September 27, 2010, the Appellate Division decided Briane K. Washington v. Board of Trustees, Police and Firemen’s Retirement System, Docket No.: A-1857-08T1. In the case, Briane Washington (“Washington”), a former Essex County Correction Officer, applied for accidental disability retirement benefits as a result of an incident on February 21, 2005, when an…
On July 30, 2010, the Appellate Division decided James Henderson v. Board of Trustees, Public Employees’ Retirement System, Docket No.: A-6176-08T2. In the case, James Henderson appealed the Board of Trustees of the Public Employees’ Retirement System’s (“Board”) denial of his application for accidental disability benefits. Frank M. Crivelli, Esq. and Donald C. Barbati, Esq. of the Pellettieri, Rabstein & Altman law firm, and the authors of this blog, successfully argued to reverse the denial, thereby obtaining accidental disability benefits for Henderson.
The case addressed whether Henderson was entitled to accidental disability retirement benefits based upon two (2) separate work-related incidents. Notably, it was undisputed that the first incident causing Henderson injury constituted a “traumatic event.” After initially becoming injured, Henderson was unable to work for some period of time, returned to light duty for a while, and then, ultimately, returned to full duty. The injury was then aggravated and accelerated by a second incident in which Henderson attempted to perform an ordinary task within the scope of his duties and responsibilities of employment.
The Board initially denied Henderson’s application for accidental disability retirement benefits. To support the denial, the Board determined that the second accident did not constitute a “traumatic event” within the meaning of the applicable case law. The Board also found that the injury originally suffered by Henderson in the first incident constituted a “pre-existing disease or condition,” thereby precluding him from receiving said benefits. This appeal ensued.
On appeal, Henderson argued that: (1) the second incident constituted a “traumatic event” within the meaning of the applicable case law; and (2) the term “pre-existing disease or condition” was never intended to include injuries suffered in prior traumatic events for purposes of whether an individual qualifies for accidental benefits.
In its decision, the Appellate Division agreed with the Board’s initial determination that the second incident did not constitute a traumatic event within the meaning of the applicable law. Significantly, however, the Court agreed with our contention that the term “pre-existing disease or condition” does not include injuries suffered in prior traumatic events. Rather, the Court found that term has been uniformly applied to bodily diseases or conditions that were not caused by a traumatic event. The Court cited a litany of case law to support this contention and articulated that the Board’s suggestion that the injuries resulting from the original traumatic event and their sequelae should be treated as pre-existing diseases or conditions is utterly inconsistent with the applicable law.
The Asbury Park Press published an article in today’s Sunday edition addressing the ability of The State of New Jersey to honor its pension obligations to those public employees that have been paying into the retirement system since the start of their public employment . The article, entitled "Can New Jersey Keep its Pension Promises?"…
On July 20, 2010, the Appellate Division decided In the Matter of Latief Dickerson, Hudson County, Docket No.: A-1323-08T2. In the case, Latief Dickerson appealed from a final decision of the Civil Service Commission (“Commission”) terminating his employment as a corrections officer with the Hudson County Department of Corrections (“Department”).
On May…
On June 3, 2010, the Appellate Division decided In the Matter of Torres Mayfield, Docket No.: A-2969-08T1. In the case, Torres Mayfield appealed from the final decision of the Civil Service Commission (“Commission”) terminating him as an Atlantic City police officer for misconduct.
Mayfield was charged with violations of Atlantic City Police Department…
