Bilodeau v. McCall

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bilodeau v. McCall

240 A.D.2d 844, 659 N.Y.S.2d 797, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6524

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 12, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 240 A.D.2d 844 (Bilodeau v. McCall) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bilodeau v. McCall, 240 A.D.2d 844, 659 N.Y.S.2d 797, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6524 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent denying petitioner’s application for disability retirement benefits.

Petitioner’s application for disability retirement benefits was denied on the ground that he was not permanently incapacitated from performing his duties as a heavy equipment operator. Significantly, respondent credited the opinion of the medical expert who testified on behalf of the New York State and Local Employees’ Retirement System that his examination of petitioner revealed no objective finding of any neurological impingement and that the injury to petitioner’s back did not permanently disable him from performing his duties. Given respondent’s authority to credit this testimony over the contrary proof offered by petitioner’s expert, we find that the determination is supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Mitchell v McCall, 234 AD2d 879).

Petitioner’s remaining contentions have been reviewed and found to be lacking in merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, White, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, entered in Albany County) to review a determination of respondent denying petitioner’s application for disability retirement benefits.

Petitioner’s application for disability retirement benefits was denied on the ground that he was not permanently incapacitated from performing his duties as a heavy equipment operator. Significantly, respondent credited the opinion of the medical expert who testified on behalf of the New York State and Local Employees’ Retirement System that his examination of petitioner revealed no objective finding of any neurological impingement and that the injury to petitioner’s back did not permanently disable him from performing his duties. Given respondent’s authority to credit this testimony over the contrary proof offered by petitioner’s expert, we find that the determination is supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Mitchell v McCall, 234 AD2d 879).

Petitioner’s remaining contentions have been reviewed and found to be lacking in merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, White, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

240 A.D.2d 844, 659 N.Y.S.2d 797, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6524, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bilodeau-v-mccall-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack