Matter of McQuade v. New York State Comptroller
2025 NY Slip Op 01856
| N.Y. App. Div. | 2025Background
- Brian McQuade, a patrol police officer, applied for accidental disability retirement benefits, claiming permanent incapacity from injuries in a March 2020 incident.
- The incident involved responding to a 911 call about a mentally ill, violent individual, during which McQuade was assaulted and injured.
- His application was denied on the grounds that the incident did not qualify as an “accident” under Retirement and Social Security Law § 363.
- After a hearing, the denial was upheld by a Hearing Officer and later adopted by the Executive Deputy Comptroller.
- McQuade then commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge the denial.
Issues
| Issue | McQuade's Argument | Comptroller's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the injuries qualify as an “accident” under retirement law | Injuries resulted from a sudden, unexpected assault; thus, were accidental | Injuries arose from risks inherent to police work; not sudden or unexpected for the role | Not an “accident”; incident was a foreseeable risk inherent to job |
| Whether responding to 911 calls about violent individuals is outside routine duties | The violent escalation was unforeseeable and not a routine risk | Responding to such calls and dealing with violence is inherent in patrol officer duties | Responding to violent incidents is a routine, anticipated duty |
| Whether training and experience make the incident less “accidental” in the legal sense | Training does not change the nature of the sudden assault | training prepares officers for these risks, making them foreseeable | Proper training meant incident was reasonably anticipated |
| Whether performance of duty disability qualifies for accidental disability benefits | McQuade argued incident justified accidental disability status | Comptroller maintained the legal requirements for “accident” not met | “Accidental” standard not met; denial affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Matter of Sammon v DiNapoli, 216 AD3d 1335 (3d Dept 2023) (clarifies that injuries from inherent occupational risks are not “accidents” for retirement purposes)
- Matter of Kelly v DiNapoli, 30 NY3d 674 (2018) (defines "accident" as unexpected events not inherent in job duties)
- Matter of Compagnone v DiNapoli, 42 NY3d 1075 (2024) (reiterates requirement that unexpectedness is essential for accident classification)
- Matter of Tully v Gardener, 222 AD3d 1163 (3d Dept 2023) (responding to violent calls is an anticipated duty for police officers)
- Matter of Van Wyen v New York State Comptroller, 215 AD3d 1217 (3d Dept 2023) (addresses how inherent job risks do not qualify as accidents for disability retirement)
- Matter of Flannelly v Gardner, 210 AD3d 1265 (3d Dept 2022) (explains denial of benefits where injury arises from routine police duties)
- Matter of Fulton v New York State Comptroller, 122 AD3d 983 (3d Dept 2014) (confirms that anticipated risks of police work are not accidents under retirement law)