IN RE: Ling LIN (2025)

Judgment (denominated an order), Supreme Court, New York County (Erika M. Edwards, J.), entered December 6, 2023, denying the petition to annul the determination of respondent Board of Trustees, dated October 12, 2022, which denied petitioner's application for accidental disability retirement (ADR) benefits, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner did not sustain his burden of showing that the Trustees’ determination to deny his application for ADR benefits and approve his application for ordinary disability retirement benefits was arbitrary and capricious or unlawful as a matter of law.  The Trustees relied upon the Medical Board's findings, which constitute expert medical opinion based on evidentiary proof, and supported its conclusion that petitioner's disabling degenerative disc disease was not caused by line of duty injuries (see Matter of Meyer v. Board of Trustees of the N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1–B Pension Fund, 90 N.Y.2d 139, 147–148, 659 N.Y.S.2d 215, 681 N.E.2d 382 [1997]).  The Medical Board based this conclusion on the MRIs taken on December 14, 2011, December 14, 2012, June 30, 2013, July 12, 2015, and September 18, 2020, as well as the June 4, 2015 opinion of one of petitioner's doctors and its own physical examinations of petitioner (see Matter of Lamar v. Nigro, 223 A.D.3d 470, 470, 203 N.Y.S.3d 66 [1st Dept. 2024], lv denied 42 N.Y.3d 909, 2024 WL 4886037 [2024];  Matter of Russell v. New York City Fire Pension Fund, 192 A.D.3d 442, 443, 139 N.Y.S.3d 805 [1st Dept. 2021]).  Moreover, the Medical Board expressly rejected petitioner's claim that multiple line of duty incidents exacerbated his underlying condition, based on a comparison of MRIs taken before and after various line of duty incidents.

We have considered petitioner's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.