Legal Opinion
Mulvaney v. DiNapoli
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided February 2, 2012PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEgan Jr., J.
Respondent is authorized to “resolve conflicts in the medical evidence and to credit one expert’s opinion over that of another, so long as the credited expert articulates a rational and fact-based opinion founded upon a physical examination and review of the pertinent medical records” (Matter of Freund v Hevesi, 34 AD3d 950, 950 [2006]). Inasmuch as the opinion of the Retirement System’s expert meets this criteria, respondent’s determination is supported by substantial evidence and, hence, will not be disturbed (see Matter of Ragno v DiNapoli, 68 AD3d 1342, 1344 [2009]; Matter of Maori v…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Freund v. HevesiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Ragno v. DiNapoliAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
3Cited by7 opinions
- Matter of Rawson v. DiNapoliAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Matter of Keitel v. DiNapoliAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Carmody-Kapral v. New York StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Matter of Jackson v. BarberAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Calhoun v. New York State & Local Employees' Retirement SystemAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.