Mulet v. Kelly
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Credible evidence rebuts the World Trade Center presumption (Administrative Code of City of NY § 13-252.1 [1] [a]), assuming it applies, and supports the Medical Board’s determination that petitioner’s disability is not traumatic in origin (see Matter of Borenstein v New York City Employees’ Retirement Sys., 88 NY2d 756, 760-761 [1996]). We have considered petitioner’s other arguments, including those based on the conflicting opinions of his psychiatrist and social worker, and find them unavailing. Concur&emdash;Mazzarelli, J.E, Saxe, Friedman and Nardelli, JJ. (See 2006 NY Slip Op 30186(U).]
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Borenstein v. New York City Employees' Retirement SystemNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
3Cited by2 opinions
- Jefferson v. KellyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- Claudio v. KellyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011