A teacher [Petitioner] filed an Article 78 challenging the decision of the Medical Board of the Teachers' Retirement System of the City of New York [Board] denying his application for accidental disability retirement benefits.
The Appellate Division sustained the Board's finding that Petitioner was not disabled was not arbitrary and capricious, and was supported by some credible evidence. The court noted also that the Board had "examined and interviewed Petitioner."
In response to the Petitioner's claim that the Medical Board ignored his medical history, the Appellate Division explained that "resolution of conflicting evidence was for the Medical Board to resolve."
Further, said the court, the findings of the Social Security Administration with respect to Petitioner's alleged disability "was not dispositive of the Medical Board's disability determination," citing Barden v New York City Employees' Retirement Sys., 291 AD2d 215 nor did the findings of the medical arbitrator, who examined Petitioner after the Medical Board made its determination, warrant Article 78 relief.
The decision is posted on the Internet at: