IN RE: Vincent CLARKE (2007)

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the Board of Trustees of the New York City Fire Department, Article 1-B Pension Fund, dated June 24, 2004, denying the petitioner's application for accident disability retirement benefits pursuant to Administrative Code of the City of New York § 13-353, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.), dated August 16, 2006, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

 The issue of whether a firefighter is disabled is determined by the Medical Board of the New York City Fire Department, Article 1-B Pension Fund (hereinafter the Medical Board) (see Administrative Code of the City of New York § 13-352;  Matter of Meyer v. Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, 90 N.Y.2d 139, 144, 659 N.Y.S.2d 215, 681 N.E.2d 382;  Matter of Vastola v. Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, 37 A.D.3d 478, 829 N.Y.S.2d 218;  Matter of Vidal v. Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, 32 A.D.3d 399, 820 N.Y.S.2d 300).   The Medical Board's determination that a firefighter is not disabled for duty is conclusive if it is supported by some credible evidence and is not irrational (see Matter of Vastola v. Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, 37 A.D.3d at 478, 829 N.Y.S.2d 218;  Matter of Vidal v. Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, 32 A.D.3d at 399, 820 N.Y.S.2d 300;  Matter of Hession v. Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, 23 A.D.3d 468, 805 N.Y.S.2d 627;  Matter of Kuczinski v. Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, 8 A.D.3d 283, 284, 777 N.Y.S.2d 693).

 Here, the Medical Board's conclusion that the petitioner was not disabled from performing his duties by an injury to his left knee is supported by credible evidence consisting of the report of its independent orthopedic consultant, who examined the petitioner and reviewed the medical records and reports of other physicians.   Although the independent consultant's findings differed from those of other physicians who examined the petitioner, where conflicting medical evidence and medical reports are presented to the Medical Board, it is solely within its province to resolve such conflicts (see Matter of Borenstein v. New York City Employees' Retirement Sys., 88 N.Y.2d 756, 761, 650 N.Y.S.2d 614, 673 N.E.2d 899;  Matter of Vastola v. Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, 37 A.D.3d at 478, 829 N.Y.S.2d 218;  Matter of Kuczinski v. Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, 8 A.D.3d at 284, 777 N.Y.S.2d 693).   The court cannot weigh the medical evidence and substitute its own judgment for that of the Medical Board (see Matter of Borenstein v. New York City Employees' Retirement Sys., 88 N.Y.2d at 761, 650 N.Y.S.2d 614, 673 N.E.2d 899;  Matter of Vastola v. Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, 37 A.D.3d at 478, 829 N.Y.S.2d 218;  Matter of Kuczinski v. Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, 8 A.D.3d at 284, 777 N.Y.S.2d 693).   Accordingly, the Board of Trustees of the New York City Fire Department, Article 1-B Pension Fund, properly upheld the Medical Board's recommendation (see Matter of Borenstein v. New York City Employees' Retirement Sys., 88 N.Y.2d at 756, 650 N.Y.S.2d 614, 673 N.E.2d 899;  Matter of Vastola v. Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, 37 A.D.3d at 478, 829 N.Y.S.2d 218;  Matter of Vidal v. Board of Trustees of N.Y. City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, 32 A.D.3d at 399, 820 N.Y.S.2d 300), and the Supreme Court properly denied the petition.

The petitioner's remaining contentions are without merit.