Matter of Whitehill v. New York State Teachers'ret. Sys.

Related Cases

Matter of Brown v. Teachers' Retirement Bd. City of N.Y
Hannahs v. NY STATE TEACHERS'RET. SYSTEM
Matter of Newcomb v. New York State Teachers'ret. Sys.
MATTER OF NEW YORK STATE TEACHERS'RET. SYS. v. Srogi
Jewell A. Brown and Jane Rose v. New York State Teachers' Retirement System Kenneth E. Buhrmaster, Hiram Korpeck, Nicholas Maletta, Frank Wells McCabe Ellis Ostrove, Richard E. Ten Haken, Carl Fredeen, Roderick Sager, and Margaret Mary Walsh, Individually and as Members of the New York State Teachers' Retirement Board Albert B. Lewis, Individually and as Superintendent of the New York State Insurance Department Spiro Bellow, Margaret Johnson, Angelo Papa, Thomas Terwilliger, Sheridan Hardenburg, Ralph Rasmusson, and J. Ronald Seasted, Individually and as Members of the Board of Education of the Jamestown Public Schools, Bessie Hannahs v. New York State Teachers' Retirement System Kenneth E. Buhrmaster, Hiram Korpeck, Nicholas Maletta, Frank Wells McCabe Ellis Ostrove, Richard E. Ten Haken, Carl Fredeen, Roderick Sager, and Margaret Mary Walsh, Individually and as Members of the New York State Teachers' Retirement Board Albert B. Lewis, Individually and as Superintendent of the New York State Insurance Department Spiro Bellow, Margaret Johnson, Angelo Papa, Thomas Terwilliger, Sheridan Hardenburg, Ralph Rasmusson, and J. Ronald Seasted, Individually and as Members of the Board of Education of the Jamestown Public Schools

73 N.Y.2d 944 (1989)

In the Matter of Richard H. Whitehill, Appellant,
v.
New York State Teachers' Retirement System, Respondent.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York.

Argued February 11, 1989. Decided March 23, 1989.

Thomas E. Brydges for appellant.

Robert Abrams, Attorney-General (Julie S. Mereson, O. Peter Sherwood and Peter H. Schiff of counsel), for respondent.

Concur: Chief Judge WACHTLER and Judges SIMONS, KAYE, ALEXANDER, TITONE, HANCOCK, JR., and BELLACOSA.

Order affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum of the Appellate Division (142 AD2d 902).