Sollas v. McCall

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sollas v. McCall

211 A.D.2d 942, 621 N.Y.S.2d 944, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 256

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

DecidedJanuary 12, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 211 A.D.2d 942 (Sollas 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

Sollas v. McCall, 211 A.D.2d 942, 621 N.Y.S.2d 944, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 256 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

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 Comptroller which denied petitioner’s applications for accidental and ordinary disability retirement benefits.

Petitioner applied for accidental and ordinary disability retirement benefits and respondent Comptroller denied the applications, finding that petitioner was not permanently incapacitated from performing his employment duties. Medical evidence supports this determination. Although conflicting medical evidence was presented, it is within the Comptroller’s exclusive authority to evaluate such conflicting evidence. We therefore find that his determination is supported by substantial evidence.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, White, Casey and. Peters, JJ., [943]*943concur. 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 Comptroller which denied petitioner’s applications for accidental and ordinary disability retirement benefits.

Petitioner applied for accidental and ordinary disability retirement benefits and respondent Comptroller denied the applications, finding that petitioner was not permanently incapacitated from performing his employment duties. Medical evidence supports this determination. Although conflicting medical evidence was presented, it is within the Comptroller’s exclusive authority to evaluate such conflicting evidence. We therefore find that his determination is supported by substantial evidence.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, White, Casey and. Peters, JJ., [943]*943concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

211 A.D.2d 942, 621 N.Y.S.2d 944, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 256, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sollas-v-mccall-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack