Adjunct Law Prof Blog

Editor: Mitchell H. Rubinstein
New York Law School

Thursday, March 15, 2012

The “dual employers” of a volunteer firefighter injured when fighting a fire are both liable for the payment of workers’ compensation benefits


Levy v Plainview Fire Dept., 89 AD3d 1331

Danny Levy, a member of the Plainview Fire Department, submitted a volunteer firefighters' claim for benefits based upon injuries allegedly sustained while assisting the City of New York Fire Department at the World Trade Center disaster in September 2001.
The Workers' Compensation Board awarded claimant benefits, finding dual liability between the Plainview Fire Department and the self-insured employer, the City of New York, on the ground that Levy's activities at ground zero were directed and controlled by both entities. Rejecting the City’s appeal, the Appellate Division affirmed the Board’s ruling.
The court noted that the General Municipal Law §209-i 1) provides that "Whenever a volunteer [firefighter] is within this state, but outside the area regularly served by the fire company or fire department of which [the volunteer] is a member and has knowledge of a fire or other emergency at or near the place where [the volunteer] is for the time being, such volunteer . . . may report to the officer in command of the paid or volunteer fire company or paid or volunteer fire department, or in command of one of the paid or volunteer fire companies or one of the paid or volunteer fire departments, engaged in the handling of any such fire or other emergency and, on an individual basis, offer his [or her] services to assist such fire company or fire department. After [the volunteer's] services are so accepted, the volunteer . . . shall then be entitled to all powers, rights, privileges and immunities granted by law to volunteer [firefighers] during the time such services are rendered, in the same manner and to the same extent as if [the volunteer] were a volunteer member of the fire company or fire department which he [or she] is assisting, including benefits under the volunteer [firefighters'] benefit law."
The Appellate Division said that the record establishes that Levy initially volunteered on his own at ground zero on September 11, 2001. Thereafter, on September 12, 2001, claimant reported to the Plainview fire house where the fire chief requested volunteers to assist in the rescue and recovery efforts at ground zero. Levy testified that over the course of the next two weeks, he reported to the City's headquarters with other Plainview firefighters who volunteered and that their activities were then directed and controlled by the City.
Accordingly, the court held that substantial evidence supported the Board's factual conclusions regarding Levy’s dual employment.
The decision is posted on the Internet at:
Reprinted with permission New York Public Personnel Law
Mitchell H. Rubinstein

Public Sector Employment Law | Permalink


The courts have and are going to be dealing with 9/11 related cases for a very long time. The courts assumed and rightly so that when a tragedy that involved a fire happened, a volunteer firefighter might be go over and assist in the rescue and clean up efforts. It's almost like having an off-duty cop who sees a crime being committed and spurs into action. It seems that standard was applied in the Levy case.

Posted by: Lulaine | Mar 16, 2012 10:46:10 AM

Post a comment