Taxability of Accidental Disability...

I received my accidental disability pension including all backpay in a very timely fashion. Good job on that one Division of Pensions and Benefits! I also went to an accountant to ammend the last 3 years' tax returns. He needed paperwork/clarification on how the pension is coded for tax purposes in order to keep the IRS from needing further paperwork when I file.

I checked every fact sheet available over the internet and except for a general statement about the State of NJ filing it as untaxable, no where could I find out why. The State PBA pension consultant was the first to provide me the information I needed. Further calls to the Division of Pensions and Benefits, including having to get nasty at one point, finally yielded the same results. It seemed like some big secret as to why this pension is not taxable. How hard would it be to put this on a fact sheet available to everyone who receives accidental disability?

So here it is folks...

"The Taxpayer received service incurred disability pension from the State of New Jersey Police and Fireman's Pension System. This pension is excludable from Gross Income under Section 104 (a)(1) of the IRC and Section 1.104-1(b) of the IRS Regs. which excludes from Gross Income the amounts received by an employee under a Workmen's Compensation Act or under a Statute in the nature of a W.C. Act that provides benefits in the nature of, in lieu of, or supplemental to W.C. to the employee for personal injury or sickness incurred in the course of employment."

The legal ruling of Caplin & Drysdale Attorneys (a law firm which specializes in federal taxation) filed January 11, 2001 caused the State of New Jersey to change their policy and to consider certain accidental disability pensions to be excludable from Gross Income.

The Division will, upon request, send ammended 1099R forms to the taxpayer and the IRS.

What's going on at the Division of Pensions and Benefits???

Since the Supreme Court decision in my case...the first major change in case law in the last 20+ years...I have received calls from two of my former fellow corrections officers, who are disabled and attempting to receive accidental disability, saying that the Division of Pensions and Benefits has put all accidental disability cases on hold pending clarification on this new standard.

How much clearer could the Supreme Court make the standard? Besides the givens for accidental disability...
"the worker is totally and permanently disabled as a direct result of a
traumatic event occurring during and as a direct result of the performance
of his regular or assigned duties and that such disability was not the result
of the member's willful negligence and that such member is mentally or
physically incapacitated for the performance of his usual duty and of any
other available duty in the department which his employer is willing to
assign to him.

The Supreme Court further clarified traumatic event as an occurence which was...
"(a) identifiable as to time and place;
(b) unexpected and undesigned; and
(c) not caused by a pre-existing condition alone or in combination
with work effort"

How much clearer could it be Division? Unless you have a pre-existing condition or were hurt by repetitive activity, you pretty much get accidental disability even those people who were traditionally excluded due to slips and falls are now included by this Court as deserving of accidental disability. This decision was sent down to clear up the confusion and keep unsuspecting, injured people from having to go bankrupt waiting months and years for court decisions and paying exhorbitant amounts in attornies fees.

Kind of makes you wonder what sort of shanagans the Board is trying to play or what sort of arguments they are trying to grasp out of thin air to keep deserving people from getting what they deserve. I can asure you that I will continue to be the watch dog on this issue.

We Won!!!!

The Supreme Court decided unanimously to reversed the ALJ and Appellate Courts' decision.

http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/opinions/index.htm

Thank you for all the support and encouragement!!!

This decision is going to benefit all law enforcement officers!!

Tomorrow's the day....

We received a call from the Supreme Court of NJ today. After 9.5 months of waiting they will release their opinion in my case tomorrow (7/24/07) at 10 am. No idea what the answer will be. Stay tuned!!!

Still waiting...tap, tap, tap, tap...

Still no decision. What exactly are they waiting for?

February 27th 2007...

Still no decision. The court decided on an inmate rights case heard 6 weeks after mine. I guess they have their priorities. It is very frustrating to have your life on hold waiting for a group of people to decide your fate whenever they choose to do that.

Imagine my surprise....

While watching NJN last night I see a commercial for the New Jersey Supreme Court and I am on it. My kids said they saw me on TV a couple times in the past week or so but I didn't really pay them any attention. Surprise, surprise!

Great Websites for Correction Officers

Check out these sites for news and information regarding NJ Corrections.

NJ Corrections

State Officer's Benevolence Association NJ

Other information...(I wish I had known at OAL)

When my case went to OAL, the OAL Judge Miller denied my accidental disability by saying that it was normal work effort, "an almost daily occurrence, " to have to respond to a Code 33 and handcuff a violent, resistant inmate. (Even though seven officers had testified to the infrequency of this occurrence)

Judge Miller stated in his decision that, "Had the petitioner been an office worker injured under the same circumstances, he may have qualified for accidental disability retirement benefits."

**Note to reader** Remember the statute governing accidental disability retirement benefits states that the petitioner must be in performance of his regular, assigned duties. How many office workers you know are regularly assigned to handcuff inmates during a Code 33?

For my Supreme Court case, I submitted monthly custody activity reports that showed how often a Code 33 occurs. (Not almost daily, more like almost monthly, I will tell you that.) To get these records I went through the Open Public Records Act. See the link provided to the right.

OAL Decisions...

***Note: These cases are all inital OAL decisions. To find out whether or not the Board accepted or rejected OAL judges' findings one would have to look up the pension board meeting for the month following release of the judges' results. Not all of these people who the OAL judge ruled in favor of actually received accidental disability due the the Board's rejection of the judge's findings.



1. Arencibia v. PFRS, DKT NO. TYP6173-03 (2005)-- Corrections officer injured while assisting fellow officers in restraining a combative, violent inmate inside an ambulance. Officer was sitting on top of inmate lying face down on gurney whose thrusting injured officer's shoulder. Three fellow officers were assisting at the time. OAL Judge determined, "It is a rare occurrence that requires four officers to subdue a mentally deranged inmate of great size and enormous strength. Incidents such as this do happen in a correctional facility but not with enough frequency to be considered normal work effort.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ06173-03_1.html

2. Class v. Board of Trustees PFRS, OAL DKT NO. TYP 2121-05 (2005)--Correction officer injured his back while assisting a fellow officer who was being assaulted by an inmate. Officer took inmate to the ground and pinned him with arms behind his back so he could be handcuffed. OAL reversed Boards' denial of accidental disability.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ02121-05_1.html

3. DeMatteo v. PFRS, OAL DKT NO.TYP12121-04S(2005)-- Officerinjured back while escorting a handcuffed when inmate dipped his shoulder and attempted to flip officer over his back. OAL judge granted accidental disability.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ12121-04_1.html

4. Dumas v. Board of Trustees PFRS, OAL DKT NO TYP8563-01 (2002)-- Inmate pushed Dumas as he tried to restrain him. Dumas back injured by blow to filing cabinet. Inmate had pushed sergeant in an offensive move then was seen as acting defensively when he pushed Dumas who was trying to restrain him. This case was used in the DeMatteo case and I do not know the final outcome but believe Dumas was denied accidental disability on the offensive v. defensive argument.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ08563-01_1.html


5. Ellis v. PFRS, OAL DKT NO. TYP4619-03 (2004)--Police officer felt "pop" in ankle while he and four other officers attempted to subdue a violent suspect. Did not know actual mechanism of injury to ankle but suspected it had been stepped on by other officer. OAL granted accidental disability.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ04619-03_1.html

6. Glennon v. PFRS, OAL DKT NO.TYP817-03 (2003)-- Many prior incidents leading to permanent disability of the knee. Slip and fall or twisting type injuries found to all be part of the normal stress and strain of her job duties. OAL denied accidental disability.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ00817-03_1.html

7. Hammock v. Board of Trustees PFRS, OAL DKT NO. TYP4258-00 (2002)-- Officer injured knee while escorting a resistant inmate down a hallway. Then in a second incident the petitioner's knee gave out while he was walking down the stairs. Neither incident was found to be a traumatic event. OAL denied accidental disability.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ4258-00_1.html

8. Hayes v. PFRS, OAL DKT NO. TYP04433-06(2006)-- Correction Officer injured arm when jerked by a gate with electronic open and close. OAL granted.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ04433-06_1.html


9. Jaeger v. PFRS, OAL DKT NO. TYP1112-02 (2005)-- Officer injured by a violent belligerent inmate who attacked her after he was found guilty during a court proceeding. She was later reinjured when her knee gave out while she was ascending a ladder-type stairwell. She was claiming accidental disability due to arthritis, a preexisting condition, which was aggravated due to the two incidents described. Board found her not totally and permanently disabled since she returned to work after both incidents and also found that the incidents in question were not traumatic events. OAL judge disagreed with the Board and found petitioner eligible for accidental disability.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ01112-02_1.html

10. Klima v. PFRS, OAL DKT NO.TYP 12438-05 (2006)-- Correction Officer injured when handcuffed inmate put down shoulder and rammed into him like a football player. OAL granted and Board awarded pension.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ12438-05_1.html

11. Laplaca v. PFRS, OAL DKT NO.TYP3398-03 (2003)--Petitioner injured back while performing the Heimlich maneuver, when patient suddenly pushed backward knocking them both off balance. OAL judge granted accidental disability.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ03398-03_1.html

12. Malanga v. Board of Trustees PFRS, OAL DKT NO.TYP2297_04 (2005)-- Corrections officer injured while attempting to unlock a gate. The wind blew the gate slamming it on the petitioner's elbow. OAL judge granted accidental disability.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ02297-04_1.html

13. Martin v. PFRS, OAL DKT NO.TYP2333-03 (2004)--PFRS denied claim for accidental disability due to "semantic quibbling over how the incident was described in early injury reports." Martin originally stated in the incident report, "While restraining an inmate employee strained back." "Martin explained that the word restrain was essentiallya term of art within the profession that was thought to generally encompass the entire incident." Martin testified at OAL that the inmate was restrained only after he attacked Martin from behind causing injury to his back. OAL judge granted accidental disability pension.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ02333-03_1.html

14. Pantuso v. State Police Retirement System, OAL DKT NO.TYP7439-03 (2005)-- Officer injured when he leaned into a car window and struggled with a suspect to get the keys out of the ignition. Pantuso was pushed and hit by the suspect while leaning into the car. OAL Judge granted accidental disability.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ07439-03_1.html

15. Richardson v. Board of Trustees PFRS, OAL DKT NO.TYP169-04 (2004)--Correction Officer injured while trying to handcuff a violent inmate who thrust his body upward and pinned officer's wrist to floor. OAL Judge denied accidental disability stating that this was normal work effort because it was a daily occurrence.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ00169-04_1.html

16. Ryan v. PFRS, OAL DKT NO. TYP345-05 (2005)-- Police Officer injured during an altercation with a suspect who punched and hit him. Initial paperwork/reports did not contain a full narrative of the incident or contain the word assault. OAL Judge granted accidental disability.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ00345-05_1.html


17. Salmon v. PFRS, OAL DKT NO.6908-05 (2006)--Police Officer injured when punched in shoulder during a boxing training session. OAL granted accidental disability.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ06908-05_1.html

18. Stoll v. Public Employees' Retirement System, OAL DKT NO.TYP6399-03 (2005)--Petitioner was a Youth Worker assigned to give individual attention to a female client because she posed a threat to herself and others. Three females in the room started fighting and petitioner was trying to break it up. One female tackled the petitioner while he was holding down another client and he was knocked backward and struck his shoulder against the wall. The argument in this case was the lack of detail on the initial incident reports. OAL Judge granted accidental disability.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ06399-03_1.html

19. Strauss v. PFRS, OAL DKT NO.TYP11779-03 (2006)-- K-9 Officer "tackled" by the dog she cared for and was knocked off balance so that she turned her foot between the ground and the kennel platform. OAL Judge granted accidental retirement.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ11779-03_1.html

20. Winfield v. Board of Trustees PFRS, OAL DKT NO. TYP8487-02 (2003)-- Correction Officer punched while attempting to restrain an inmate who had initially punched a fellow officer. Initial reports did not reflect that Winfield had been punched. "While it is not unusual to have to handcuff an inmate, the situation in Winfield was unusual because theinmate was refusing all commands and was out of control." OAL Judge granted accidental disability stating that "...in many instances the injury that may occur is not at first recognized as one that will cause the officer to be totally and permanently injured and therefore have to seek to meet the Kane test in order for the officer to establish his right to accidental disability pension. Thus, the written reports of the incidents and injuries prepared just after the event, while normally a good guide to what occurred, must be read with caution in regard to determining the exact circumstances of the event."

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ08487-02_1.html


21. Zita v. PFRS, OAL DKT NO.TYP2295-04 (2004)-- Correction Officer injured when a violent inmate grabbed him by the neck, spun him around and slammed him into a wall. Inmate had initially assaulted another officer and the incident reports did not include his assault on the petitioner. OAL Judge granted accidental disability.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ02295-04_1.html

22. Zolkov v. Public Employees Retirement System, OAL DKT NO.TYP8879-04 (2005)-- Petitioner was a worker at Ancora. She was injured while trying to remove a patient from her bed to escort her during a firedrill. The patient and petitioner fell to the ground and petitioner was found unconscious and suffers from knee injuries. OAL granted accidental disability.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oal/html/initial/typ08879-04_1.html

Appellate Division Decisions...

1. Duignan v. Board of Trustees Public Employees Retirement System, 223 N.J. Super. at 218 (1988)-- The court found that an eye injury from the bristles of a broom was a traumatic event. In this case, a custodian was hanging a push broom in a suppy closet when the broom handle spun around, causing the bristles to strike his eyeball. The court ruled that one must look at the organ affected to determine what force is necessary to be considered a traumatic event. (AG)

I have no link for this case.

2. Esposito v. PFRS, A-4928-01T5 (2003)--Officer directing traffic injured knee when jumped out of the way of an oncoming vehicle. ALJ had originally granted accidental disability but PFRS rejected ALJ's decision. Appellate court granted accidental disability. "Focus is on the entire event." The force in this case was determined to be from the speeding vehicle that would have caused greater injury had the petitioner not jumped out of the way. (AG)

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a4928-01.opn.html

3. Fairweather v. Public Employees Retirement System, A-1421-03 (2004)-- Worker at a facility with mental patients injured when a frightened mental patient, who she was trying to evacuate from a burning building, jerked his hand away from hers and they slid down three icy steps to the ground. Board initially rejected claim and sent to OAL. ALJ found for the accidental disability but Board then rejected his decision. Appellate judges reversed Board's decision and granted accidental disability. The patient jerking his hand away was seen as the causative factor or "great rush of force" that precipitated the fall. Distinguished this case from ordinary slip-and-fall cases.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a1421-03.opn.html

4. Gigante v. Board of Trustees PFRS, A-3241-04T5 (2005)-- Police officer injured when she was attempting to assist four fellow officers in arresting a resistant suspect lying face down on the floor in a garage. Gigante never made contact with suspect but was injured when throwing aside cases of soda and being knocked by other officers. In the initial reports petitioner did not report any contact with other individuals but reported to physician that she was injured while throwing aside cases of soda. Board and OAL judge denied accidental disability. Appellate court reversed their decision and took the petitioner's version of the account in addition to the reports and viewed it as one incident which they concluded was a "traumatic event".

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a3241-04.opn.html


5. Nissel v. Public Employees Retirement System, A-6281-04 (2006)-- Janitor in a school injured when a buffing machine malfunctioned and landed on his foot causing permanent injury. OAL and Board originally denied accidental disability citing "normal work effort." Appellate Court reversed this decision.

**Excellant wording in Appellate Court decision differentiating normal work effort from a traumatic event.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a6281-04.opn.html

6. Richardson v. Board of Trustees PFRS, A-2811-04T2 (2005)-- Appellate court agreed with OAL Judge Miller on the normal work effort and actually quoted his "happens almost daily" argument.

Link to case: www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/appellate/a2811-04.opn.html

Supreme Court Decisions Affecting Accidental Disability Retirement....

1. Cattani v. Board of Trustees, PFRS, 69 N.J. 578, 583 (1976)-- Decided that the standard should include injuries caused by a violent, tangible, physical impact from an external force. Attemping to limit eligibility. (D)

2. Gerba v. PFRS, 83 N.J. at 183-- Court held that the legislature ammended the statute to narrow greatly the eligibility criteria for accidental disability.

3. Kane v. PFRS, supra, 100 N.J. at 663-- Courts decision came up with the Kane test listed in an earlier post. "The focus of the inquiry is on the event itself rather than the injury."

This case must be obtained through LexusNexus or other company.

4. Gable v. Board of Trustees Public Retirement System, 115 N.J. 212, 220 (1989)-- Officer involved in three incidents: powder thrown in face then struck by inmate, kicked in chest and propelled against a concrete wall by drunken inmate, and dragged down a flight of stairs while escorting a large unruly inmate. The Court found

"these violent incidents are clearly distinguishable from the sort of
commonplace happenings that we determined in Kane are part of
the normal stress or strain of the normal work effort: a police officer
stepping on a stone; a firefighter climbing onto a fire truck; a firefighter
lifting a heavy ladder. Rather, they are similar to our examples of
incidents that extend beyond the stress and strain of the normal job
duties, ie., a fireman being blown off a roof, fallingoff the top step of a
tall ladder, or being struck by a falling beam.

We recognize that a correction officer's job is dangerous. There is always
the possibility that he or she will be attacked violently by an inmate.
Likewise, a firefighter might be struck by a falling beam, blown off a roof,
or fall from a tall ladder. These occurrences, however, while occupational
hazards, do not occur frequently enough to constitute normal stress or
strain. Although a correction officer... may realize that there is a "potential
that he or she will be called upon to subdue an inmate, an officer does not
expect his or her daily routine will normally involve being struck by an
aggressive or escaping inmate." ( AG)

This case must be obtained through LexusNexus.


5. Mazza v. Board of Trustees PFRS supra 143, N.J. 23-24 (A-21-95)--- Officer injured back when horse he was riding reared and his body twisted in the saddle. Court held that the twisting was not a traumatic event because it did not involve a great rush of force. There was no physical, tangible impact. (D).

To view a syllabus that explains this decision go to www.lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/courts/supreme/a-21-95.opn.html


6. Maynard v. Board of Trustees of Teacher's Pension and Annuity Fund, 113 N.J. 169 (1988)--school teacher slipped and fell on a highly polished floor. Court concluded that slips-and-falls at ground level are not traumatic events because they do not involve a great rush of force or uncontrollable power. Court distinguished ordinary ground level slip and fall and a fall from a greater height even where the injured party was in part to blame for his decent: in ordinary slip and fall cases, no force or power originates anywhere except from the person falling and any gravitational force generated by the fall is not "great." (D)

7. Ciecwisz v. Board of Trustees PFRS, 113 N.J. 180 (1988)--not a "taumatic event" where corrections officer slipped and fell on cooking oil spilled on floor by inmates. (D)

Court Decisions...

I will briefly summarize the major court decisions. If you would like to view the entire case I will include links for those that I have. Some of the older Supreme Court cases can only be obtained from Lexus Nexus or similar company. I will break up the decisions into Supreme Court Decisions, Appellate Level Decisions, and OAL Decisions.

Key to Cases (to save myself time typing):

(AG) means they were awarded Accidental Disability by the courts and granted by the
PRFS Board.

(AN) means they were awarded Accidental Disability by the courts but not granted by PFRS.

(D) denied Accidental Disability by the courts/ PFRS never reverses this decision.




Prior to 1964, Accidental Disability benefits were provided to an employee who was disabled for physical injuries arising out of an "accident." The legislature then ammended the statute by replacing the word "accident" with the words "traumatic event." The case law provided here especially that from the Supreme Court attempts to clarify traumatic event.

Statute Governing Accidental Disability Pensions and Kane test

N.J.S.A. 43:16 A-7 sets forth the criteria governing Accidental Disability Retirement Benefits by members of the PFRS. The statute states in pertinent part:

"...the member shall certify that the member is permanently and totally disabled as a direct result of a traumatic event occurring and as a direct result of the performance of his regular or assigned duties..."




Kane vs. Board of Trustees PFRS, 11 NJ 655 (1985)-- the case defining the required standards for a "traumatic event," established that for a traumatic event to have occurred...

1. the injury must not have occurred as a result of the stress and strain of the normal work effort.

2. met involuntarily with the object or matter that was the source of harm

3. the injury must have been caused by a great rush of force or uncontrollable power

Purpose of this blog...

This blog is set up to help all Police and Fireman's Retirement System employees who should qualify for Accidental Disability Benefits get their pensions. I will list important links, summarize pertinent cases, and provide any information I have come upon in my fight for my pension. This website is not meant to provide legal advice but to provide and disseminate information.

A little about me...

My name is Stewart Richardson and I was injured on January 7, 2003 while attempting to handcuff a violent, resistant inmate during an emergency code 33. The PFRS Board of Trustees denied my application for Accidental Disability Retirement by letter dated December 22, 2003. The matter was referred to the Office of Administrative Law on January 13, 2004. It was heard by W.Todd Miller, ALJ on November 30, 2004 and denied December 3, 2004. You can read Judge Miller's decision by searching Rutger's Law Library OAL Docket No. TYP 169-04.

The case was appealed to the Appellate Division and heard by a two judge per curiam (Conley and Winkelstein) which was decided December 2, 2005. In an unpublished opinion it was further denied Docket No. A-2811-04T2. At this point I could no longer afford to pay for legal representation and decided to apply for certification to the Supreme Court of NJ pro se (as my own attorney). My application for certification was granted and I argued my case in front of the Supreme Court on October 10, 2006.

You can view my argument on web cast by visiting

http://njlegallib.rutgers.edu/supct/args/A_100_05.php


As of today I am still awaiting a decision from the Supreme Court.