Dugan v. Kerik

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dugan v. Kerik

16 A.D.3d 142, 790 N.Y.S.2d 131, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2200

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

DecidedMarch 3, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 16 A.D.3d 142 (Dugan v. Kerik) 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

Dugan v. Kerik, 16 A.D.3d 142, 790 N.Y.S.2d 131, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2200 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael D. Stallman, J.), entered February 14, 2002, which denied petitioner police officer’s application to annul respondent Board of Trustees’ denial of her application for accidental disability retirement benefits, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Medical Board’s finding that petitioner’s disabling degenerative condition was unrelated to her 1982 line-of-duty accident is supported by some credible evidence, including conservative treatment after the accident involving an absence from work of only three weeks and her return to full duty for some 15 years (see Matter of Doyle v Kelly, 8 AD3d 125 [2004]). Concur — Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Friedman, Marlow and Nardelli, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael D. Stallman, J.), entered February 14, 2002, which denied petitioner police officer’s application to annul respondent Board of Trustees’ denial of her application for accidental disability retirement benefits, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Medical Board’s finding that petitioner’s disabling degenerative condition was unrelated to her 1982 line-of-duty accident is supported by some credible evidence, including conservative treatment after the accident involving an absence from work of only three weeks and her return to full duty for some 15 years (see Matter of Doyle v Kelly, 8 AD3d 125 [2004]). Concur — Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Friedman, Marlow and Nardelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 A.D.3d 142, 790 N.Y.S.2d 131, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2200, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dugan-v-kerik-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack