Howard v. Wyman

*714Concur — Stevens, P. J., Markewich, Nunez and Kupferman, JJ.; McGivern, J., dissents in the following memorandum: I conclude the word “ catastrophe ” is limited in its application to the unforeseeable forces of nature, and does not include a burglary. I find no valid basis for interfering with the construction given the pertinent statute and regulation by the officers and agency charged with its administration. (Udall v. Tollman, 380 U. S. 1,16; Matter of Agosto v. Wyman, 35 A D 2d 1080.) Particularly, in view of the legislative history which led to the enactment of the Simplified Payment…