Riddick v. Board of Trustees

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Riddick v. Board of Trustees

304 A.D.2d 377, 756 N.Y.S.2d 747, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3806

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

DecidedApril 10, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 304 A.D.2d 377 (Riddick v. Board of Trustees) 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

Riddick v. Board of Trustees, 304 A.D.2d 377, 756 N.Y.S.2d 747, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3806 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Stall-man, J.), entered June 26, 2002, which denied and dismissed the petition brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul respondent’s determination, dated April 11, 2001, denying petitioner’s application for accident disability benefits, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The determination by the Medical Board, properly relied upon by respondent Board of Trustees (see Matter of Tobin v [378]*378Steisel, 64 NY2d 254, 259 [1985]), that petitioner’s disability was the result of a preexisting degenerative condition, namely osteochondritis dissecans, rather than a line-of-duty incident, was supported by credible medical evidence. Accordingly, respondent Board’s determination denying petitioner accident disability retirement benefits was not arbitrary and capricious and may not be judicially disturbed (see Meyer v Board of Trustees, 90 NY2d 139, 145 [1997]). Concur — Buckley, P.J., Nardelli, Andrias, Friedman and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Stall-man, J.), entered June 26, 2002, which denied and dismissed the petition brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 to annul respondent’s determination, dated April 11, 2001, denying petitioner’s application for accident disability benefits, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The determination by the Medical Board, properly relied upon by respondent Board of Trustees (see Matter of Tobin v [378]*378Steisel, 64 NY2d 254, 259 [1985]), that petitioner’s disability was the result of a preexisting degenerative condition, namely osteochondritis dissecans, rather than a line-of-duty incident, was supported by credible medical evidence. Accordingly, respondent Board’s determination denying petitioner accident disability retirement benefits was not arbitrary and capricious and may not be judicially disturbed (see Meyer v Board of Trustees, 90 NY2d 139, 145 [1997]). Concur — Buckley, P.J., Nardelli, Andrias, Friedman and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

304 A.D.2d 377, 756 N.Y.S.2d 747, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3806, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/riddick-v-board-of-trustees-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack