Van Buren v. Regan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Van Buren v. Regan

196 A.D.2d 934, 601 N.Y.S.2d 977, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8691

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

DecidedSeptember 23, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 196 A.D.2d 934 (Van Buren v. Regan) 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

Van Buren v. Regan, 196 A.D.2d 934, 601 N.Y.S.2d 977, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8691 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

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 which denied petitioner’s application for performance of duty disability retirement benefits.

It is uncontroverted that petitioner suffers from mitral valve prolapse (hereinafter MVP), a structural abnormality of the heart which takes years to develop. The medical experts for petitioner and the New York State and Local Police and Fire Retirement System both agreed that the cause of MVP is unknown. The expert for the Retirement System testified, however, that there is no evidence that MVP is produced by the physical activity or emotional strain that petitioner might encounter in his job. Although petitioner’s expert disagreed, it was for respondent to resolve this conflicting medical evidence (see, Matter of DiFede v Regan, 130 AD2d 832, 834). Based on our review of the entire record, we find that competent evidence exists to rebut the "heart presumption” provided in Retirement and Social Security Law § 363-a (1) (see, Matter of Ellison v Regan, 189 AD2d 1076; Matter of Flynn v Regan, 178 AD2d 887, 889; Matter of Nerney v New York State Policemen’s & Firemen’s Retirement Sys., 156 AD2d 775, 776, lv denied 75 NY2d 710).

Mikoll, J. P., Yesawich Jr., Mercure, Crew III and Mahoney, 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 which denied petitioner’s application for performance of duty disability retirement benefits.

It is uncontroverted that petitioner suffers from mitral valve prolapse (hereinafter MVP), a structural abnormality of the heart which takes years to develop. The medical experts for petitioner and the New York State and Local Police and Fire Retirement System both agreed that the cause of MVP is unknown. The expert for the Retirement System testified, however, that there is no evidence that MVP is produced by the physical activity or emotional strain that petitioner might encounter in his job. Although petitioner’s expert disagreed, it was for respondent to resolve this conflicting medical evidence (see, Matter of DiFede v Regan, 130 AD2d 832, 834). Based on our review of the entire record, we find that competent evidence exists to rebut the "heart presumption” provided in Retirement and Social Security Law § 363-a (1) (see, Matter of Ellison v Regan, 189 AD2d 1076; Matter of Flynn v Regan, 178 AD2d 887, 889; Matter of Nerney v New York State Policemen’s & Firemen’s Retirement Sys., 156 AD2d 775, 776, lv denied 75 NY2d 710).

Mikoll, J. P., Yesawich Jr., Mercure, Crew III and Mahoney, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

196 A.D.2d 934, 601 N.Y.S.2d 977, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8691, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/van-buren-v-regan-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack