Court reverses PFRS trustees’ narrow
reading of accidental disability standards
Recently, the Appellate Division reversed a decision by the PFRS Board of Trustees which had
denied a Belleville officer accidental disability
retirement benefits. In Zadroga v. PFRS, the Court
concluded that the Board of Trustees misapplied
the “undesigned and unexpected” element of the
accidental disability standard. As a result, the Court
decided that the Belleville officer was entitled to
accidental disability retirement benefits for the
psychological injury which indisputably resulted
from the incident.
The facts are as follows: In July 2009, the officer and his partner were involved in a high-speed pursuit of a suspected stolen
car with three occupants. The chase ended when the suspects
drove the car into a dead-end street. The officer and his partner
were able to block the suspects’ car with their police vehicle.
The officer got out of his car to chase one of the fleeing suspects when he heard the remaining suspects in the vehicle gun
the engine. He turned in time to see his partner standing
outside the police vehicle blocking the suspects’ only possible
escape route. The officer ran back to assist his partner and
smashed the front window of the suspects’ car. The officer was
not able to reach the driver who accelerated the car forward,
knocking the officer to the ground and striking his
partner with sufficient force to propel him into the air.
The officer next heard the sound of gun fire and saw
the muzzle flash from his partner’s weapon. The
officer then assisted his partner, who fortunately suffered only minor injuries. The driver of the stolen
vehicle was shot and killed by the officer’s partner.
In July 2011, the officer applied for accidental disability benefits based upon Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), which he suffered as a result of the 2009
incident. There was no dispute that the officer was totally and
permanently disabled as a result of PTSD, and that his disability
was a direct result of the July 2009 incident. However, the PFRS
Board denied his claim for accidental disability benefits on the
grounds that the incident was not “undesigned and unexpected,” one of the prerequisites for eligibility for accidental disability benefits. Instead, the Board granted the officer ordinary
disability benefits. The officer appealed the Board’s decision to
the Appellate Division. The only issue on appeal was whether
the officer’s psychological injury was caused by an “undesigned
and unexpected” event, entitling him to accidental, rather than
ordinary, disability benefits.
Generally, the Appellate Division gives deference to PFRS
& ! !' !! ' ' ! !' ! !
& ! !' # ' ' # ' ! !
& ' %' ' '" ' !'
& ! ' '$ ! $ '
& !%' '
& ' ! ' !! ' '
& ' ! ' '!!' '
'!!
& !!' ' ' !! '
& !' '
' #' #' '
' ' ! '!!' '
10
NEW JERSEY COPS
■
NOVEMBER 2015
% 0 !+ ' '&%)0 # / 0
*!) 0 0
0 .$&% 0 &*# + ' 0
, '"0 0 0
#0 0
0
-0 0 0
0 ()0) ) 0 )' )0
' 0 #&&'0
' %)&%0 0
0
#0 0
0
-0 0
0