Klonowski v. Department of Fire of City of Auburn, 58 N.Y.2d 398 (1983)

A fireman who applies for accidental disability retirement before voluntary retirement is effective is entitled to the difference between regular salary and the disability allowance from the date of voluntary retirement, once the disability retirement is granted.

Summary

Joseph Klonowski, a fireman, injured himself in the line of duty and applied for accidental disability retirement. Subsequently, he submitted a notice for voluntary retirement. After his voluntary retirement became effective, his application for accidental disability benefits was approved. He then sought payment under General Municipal Law § 207-a, which provides for the difference between his regular salary and the disability allowance. The city initially granted the request but later terminated payments, arguing that he was not receiving § 207-a benefits at the time he was granted accidental retirement benefits. The Court of Appeals held that Klonowski was entitled to the wage supplement, clarifying the rights of voluntarily retired firemen under § 207-a after the 1977 amendments.

Facts

Klonowski worked as a fireman from 1947 to 1978.
He sustained a work-related injury in February 1977.
He applied for accidental disability retirement on May 8, 1978.
He voluntarily retired on May 10, 1978.
His application for accidental disability benefits was approved on September 6, 1978.
The City of Auburn initially provided wage supplement payments but terminated them in January 1979.

Procedural History

Klonowski initiated a CPLR article 78 proceeding to compel payment of the wage supplement.
The Supreme Court severed the issue of the wage supplement and dismissed it, finding that Klonowski’s right to § 207-a benefits vested at the time of his injury, but he waived these benefits by voluntarily retiring.
The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court’s decision, citing Matter of Weber v. Department of Fire of City of Syracuse.
The Court of Appeals granted leave to appeal.

Issue(s)

Whether a fireman who applies for accidental disability retirement benefits before his voluntary retirement becomes effective is entitled to receive the wage supplement under General Municipal Law § 207-a after the accidental disability retirement is granted.

Holding

Yes, because the 1977 amendments to General Municipal Law § 207-a, particularly subdivision 4, indicate a legislative intent to provide wage supplements to disabled firemen receiving accidental disability benefits, regardless of whether they voluntarily retire.

Court’s Reasoning

The court analyzed the legislative history of General Municipal Law § 207-a and the impact of the 1977 amendments. It highlighted that the amendments aimed to shift the financial burden of disabled firefighters from municipalities to the retirement system without reducing the amount of payments to the firefighters. The court noted that prior to the amendments, municipalities sought ways to remove disabled firemen from their payrolls, often unsuccessfully. The 1977 amendments allowed municipalities to involuntarily retire firemen eligible for accidental disability retirement and pay the difference between their regular salary and retirement benefits. The court emphasized the second sentence of subdivision 4, which states: “Where such a fireman retires or is retired under any procedure applicable to him… he shall thereafter… continue to be entitled to medical treatment and hospital care necessitated by reason of such injury or illness.” The court reasoned that this provision demonstrates the legislature’s intent to provide benefits to disabled firemen, whether they voluntarily retire or are involuntarily retired. The court explicitly stated that Matter of Weber v. Department of Fire of City of Syracuse, which held that a voluntarily retired fireman was not entitled to § 207-a benefits, is no longer good law in light of the amendments. The court also cited Matter of Mashnouk v. Miles and Cook v. City of Binghamton, noting that the primary aim of the 1977 statute was to shift the financial burden without reducing the amount of payments. The court concluded that Klonowski was entitled to the wage supplement because he was eligible for accidental disability benefits at the time of his voluntary retirement, and the subsequent award of benefits confirmed his eligibility retroactive to his retirement date. The court found that Klonowski, despite his voluntary retirement, remained entitled to the § 207-a differential allowance until he reached the normal retirement age. The court interpreted the words “then entitled” in subdivision 4 to mean “at the time of retirement.”