Rodriguez v. Kelly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rodriguez v. Kelly

8 A.D.3d 70, 778 N.Y.S.2d 163, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7970

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

DecidedJune 10, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 8 A.D.3d 70 (Rodriguez v. Kelly) 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

Rodriguez v. Kelly, 8 A.D.3d 70, 778 N.Y.S.2d 163, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7970 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert D. Lippmann, J.), entered April 3, 2003, which denied the petition brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 challenging rejection of applications for accident or ordinary disability retirement benefits, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Medical Board’s determination that petitioner’s hearing loss was not substantial enough to disable him from performing the full duties of a New York City police officer was based on reviews of credible evidence in the form of medical reports and tests, and thus was neither arbitrary nor capricious (Matter of Borenstein v New York City Employees’ Retirement Sys., 88 NY2d 756 [1996]). Concur—Buckley, P.J., Lerner, Friedman, Marlow and Sweeny, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert D. Lippmann, J.), entered April 3, 2003, which denied the petition brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 challenging rejection of applications for accident or ordinary disability retirement benefits, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The Medical Board’s determination that petitioner’s hearing loss was not substantial enough to disable him from performing the full duties of a New York City police officer was based on reviews of credible evidence in the form of medical reports and tests, and thus was neither arbitrary nor capricious (Matter of Borenstein v New York City Employees’ Retirement Sys., 88 NY2d 756 [1996]). Concur—Buckley, P.J., Lerner, Friedman, Marlow and Sweeny, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 A.D.3d 70, 778 N.Y.S.2d 163, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7970, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rodriguez-v-kelly-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack