GARY MUCCIGROSSI v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, POLICE AND FIREMEN'S RETIREMENT

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-1362-05T21362-05T2

GARY MUCCIGROSSI,

Petitioner-Appellant,

v.

BOARD OF TRUSTEES, POLICE

AND FIREMEN'S RETIREMENT

SYSTEM,

Respondent-Respondent.

_______________________________________

 
Argued telephonically March 5, 2007 - Decided August 8, 2007

Before Judges C. S. Fisher and Yannotti.

On appeal from a Final Determination of the Board of Trustees, Police and Firemen's Retirement System, PFRS # 3-10-30222.

Samuel J. Halpern argued the cause for appellant (Neil A. Malvone, on the brief).

Eileen S. Den-Bleyker, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent (Stuart Rabner, Attorney General, attorney; Patrick DeAlmeida, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Kellie L. Kiefer Pushko, Deputy Attorney General, on the brief).

PER CURIAM

Petitioner Gary Muccigrossi appeals from a final determination of the Board of Trustees (Board) of the Police and Firemen's Retirement System (PFRS), dated October 18, 2005, which denied petitioner's application for accidental disability retirement benefits pursuant to N.J.S.A. 43:16A-7(1). The Board adopted the initial decision of the Administrative Law Judge, who had determined that Muccigrossi had not been disabled from the performance of his usual duties by a "traumatic event" under the test established by Kane v. Bd. of Trustees, Police and Firemen's Ret. Sys., 100 N.J. 651, 663 (1985).

However, while this appeal was pending, the Supreme Court decided Richardson v. Bd. of Trustees, Police & Firemen's Retirement Sys., N.J. (2007). The Court substantially modified the Kane standard. Accordingly, we are convinced that the matter should be remanded to the Board for reconsideration in light of Richardson. We express no opinion as to whether the incident of December 1, 1993 should be considered a "traumatic event" under the new standard announced in Richardson.

 
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. We do not retain jurisdiction.

(continued)

(continued)

2

A-1362-05T2

August 8, 2007