AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

IN THE MATTER OF COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER, RESPONDENT, v. WESTCHESTER COUNTY CORRECTION OFFICERS BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION, INC., APPELLANT. (MATTER NO. 1) COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER, RESPONDENT,

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the orders are affirmed, with one bill of costs.

Westchester County (hereinafter the County) paid disability benefits pursuant to General Municipal Law § 207-c to three correction officers pending hearings to determine the officers' entitlement to those benefits. Following hearings it was determined that the officers had not suffered work-related injuries, and therefore they were not entitled to benefits under General Municipal Law § 207-c. The County then commenced three plenary actions to recover sums already paid. In turn, the Westchester County Correction Officers Benevolent Association, Inc. (hereinafter the COBA), filed a grievance asserting that pursuant to the parties' collective bargaining agreement the County could not recover such sums. Thereafter COBA sought arbitration of the grievance. The individual defendants interposed answers in the plenary actions alleging, inter alia, that the County's sole remedy was to proceed to arbitration.

Inasmuch as the County's authority to make initial determinations of entitlement to General Municipal Law § 207-c benefits was not a mandatory subject of collective bargaining (see, Matter of City of Watertown v. State of New York Pub. Empl. Relations Bd., 95 N.Y.2d 73; see also, DePaolo v. Schenectady County, 85 N.Y.2d 527), the County's right to recover benefits improperly paid to officers who are not suffering from work-related injuries was also not a mandatory subject of collective bargaining.

The collective bargaining agreement in this case, as well as General Municipal Law § 207-c, is silent as to whether the County may commence an action to recover benefits improperly paid (see, Newfield Cent. School Teachers Assn. [Matter of Newfield Cent. School Dist.], 258 A.D.2d 845). Further, the agreement should not be construed so as to expand the officers' rights under the statute (see e.g., Matter of Uniform Firefighters of Cohoes Local 2562, IAFF, AFL-CIO v. Matter of City of Cohoes, 94 N.Y.2d 686).

Moreover, there is a strong public policy in favor of protecting the public fisc and recovering moneys improperly or illegally paid out (see, Matter of Cortlandt Nursing Home v. Axelrod, 66 N.Y.2d 169; Matter of Shufelt v. Beaudoin, 116 A.D.2d 422. For this reason as well, arbitration is not available (see, Matter of City of New York v. Uniformed Fire Officers Assn., 95 N.Y.2d 273 [Oct. 17, 2000]).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATTER OF COUNTY, WESTCHESTER v. COUNTY CORR
(Dec 19, 2000)