Cole-Hatchard v. McCallCole-Hatchard v. McCall
Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Keegan, J.), entered October 4, 2002 in Albany County, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CFLR article 78, granted respondents’ motions to dismiss the petition.
Fetitioner, a member of respondent Town of Clarkstown Folice Department, was injured on the job in 1997. His subsequent applications for accidental disability and performance of duty disability retirement benefits were denied and those denials were upheld on appeal (Matter of Cole-Hatchard v McCall,
The procedure for challenging a retirement system service credit determination is to request a hearing and redetermination, and, if one is dissatisfied with the final determination, to
We also find that Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition as to the municipal respondents. The gist of petitioner’s claim against respondent Town of Clarkstown and its police department is that the method by which his workers’ compensation benefits were paid had an adverse impact on the determination of his retirement service credits. Since the Comptroller has exclusive authority to determine such matters (see Marsh v New York State & Local Employees’ Retirement Sys., supra at 714), the appropriate forum for resolution of this aspect of petitioner’s claim is the promised administrative hearing.
To the extent not specifically addressed, petitioner’s remaining arguments have been considered and rejected.
Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.