Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: Lawrence E. BARNETT, appellant, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF the NEW YORK CITY FIRE DEPARTMENT, ARTICLE 1-B PENSION FUND, et al., respondents.
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 March 6, 1997, denying the petitioner's application for a service-connected accidental disability retirement pension, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garry, J.), dated April 27, 1998, 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). The Medical Board's determination is conclusive if supported by “any credible evidence” and is not irrational (see, e.g., Matter of Meyer v. Board of Trustees of New York City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, 90 N.Y.2d 139, 145, 659 N.Y.S.2d 215, 681 N.E.2d 382; Matter of Borenstein v. New York City Employees' Retirement Sys., 88 N.Y.2d 756, 760, 650 N.Y.S.2d 614, 673 N.E.2d 899; Matter of Schwarzrock v. Board of Trustees of New York City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, 238 A.D.2d 596, 597, 656 N.Y.S.2d 386). Here, the Medical Board performed its own physical examination of the petitioner, and concluded that he was not disabled. In addition, the record contains several negative magnetic resonance imaging reports, electromyographs, and neurological studies. Based on the credible evidence before the Medical Board, its determination was not irrational (see, e.g., Matter of Meyer v Board of Trustees of New York City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, supra, at 149-150, 659 N.Y.S.2d 215, 681 N.E.2d 382; Matter of Monahan v. Bratton, 233 A.D.2d 274, 650 N.Y.S.2d 545; Matter of Cassidy v. Ward, 169 A.D.2d 482, 564 N.Y.S.2d 165; Matter of D'Angelo v. Ward, 159 A.D.2d 425, 553 N.Y.S.2d 325; Matter of Tripi v. Ward, 158 A.D.2d 336, 551 N.Y.S.2d 24; Matter of Krolowitz v. Regan, 97 A.D.2d 902, 470 N.Y.S.2d 695; Matter of Murgia v. Regan, 90 A.D.2d 897, 456 N.Y.S.2d 508). Accordingly, the judgment must be affirmed (see, e.g., Matter of Santoro v. Board of Trustees of New York City Fire Dept., Art. 1-B Pension Fund, 217 A.D.2d 660, 660-661, 629 N.Y.S.2d 484).
The appellant's remaining contentions are without merit.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: September 27, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)