A breach of contract complaint fails as a matter of law in the absence of any showing that a specific provision of the contract was breached

To contact us Click HERE

A breach of contract complaint fails as a matter of law inthe absence of any showing that a specific provision of the contract wasbreachedWestchester County Corr. Officers Benevolent Assn., Inc. vCounty of Westchester, 2012 NY Slip Op 07106 {See, also, 2012 NY Slip Op 07107decided herewith], Appellate Division, Second Department

The Westchester County Correction Officers Benevolent Association, Inc., andindividually named retired correction officers, commenced this action torecover damages for an alleged breach of contract based on Westchester County’s'failure to pay the individual plaintiffs benefits equivalent to those providedby the Worker's Compensation Law for loss of earning capacity due to permanentpartial disability.
The Association argued that any correction officer who hasbeen receiving disability benefits pursuant to General Municipal Law §207-c andwho then receives a disability retirement pension upon the County ofWestchester's application* for such retirementon the behalf of the individual is entitled, upon retirement, to benefitsequivalent to those provided by the Workers' Compensation Law for loss ofearning capacity due to permanent partial disability.
Westchester, on the other hand, contended that the parties' intention at thetime that the collective bargaining agreement (the CBA) was negotiated was toassure that the correction officers were afforded all of their rights under theWorkers' Compensation Law.
The Associating had admitted that the CBA "issilent as to awards for permanent partial disability." Accordingly, arguedthe County, as the CBA is silent as to such awards, the correction officers were not entitled, upon retirement, to Workers' Compensation awards for permanentpartial disability.
The Appellate Division pointed out that "A breach of contract cause of action fails as a matter oflaw in the absence of any showing that a specific provision of the contract wasbreached."

Here, the Association failed to identify a specific provisionin the CBA that requires the County to pay benefits equivalent to thosepaid pursuant to the Workers' Compensation Law for loss of earning capacity dueto permanent partial disability. Accordingly, ruled the court, the Association failed toestablish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law.
The Appellate Division explained that "[W]hen the terms of a written contract are clear and unambiguous, theintent of the parties must be found within the four corners of the contract,giving practical interpretation to the language employed and the parties'reasonable expectations. Thus, a written agreement that is complete, clear andunambiguous on its face must be enforced according to the plain meaning of itsterms."
Further, said the court, "[i]nterpretation of anunambiguous contract provision is a function for the court, and mattersextrinsic to the agreement may not be considered when the intent of the partiescan be gleaned from the face of the instrument. A court should not imply a termwhich the parties themselves failed to include."
Finding that the specific provisions of the CBA did notprovide for the retirement benefits sought by the Association, the AppellateDivision held that the Association’s “reliance upon generalized language in theCBA is unavailing.”
* §207-c.2 of the GeneralMunicipal Law, in pertinent part, provides that the “Payment of the full amountof regular salary or wages, as provided by subdivision one of this section,shall be discontinued with respect to any policeman who is permanently disabledas a result of an injury or sickness incurred or resulting from the performanceof his [or her] duties if such policeman is granted an accidental disabilityretirement allowance …If application for such retirement allowance or pensionis not made by such policeman, application therefor may be made by the head ofthe police force or as otherwise provided by the chief executive officer or locallegislative body of the municipality by which such policeman is employed. [Emphasis supplied.]
The decision is posted on the Internet at:http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2012/2012_07106.htm