Case Name: In the Matter of Thomas J. Mulvaney, Petitioner, v. Thomas P. DiNapoli, as Comptroller of the State of New York, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2012-02-02
Citations: 92 A.D.3d 1021
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of Thomas J. Mulvaney, Petitioner, v Thomas P. DiNapoli, as Comptroller of the State of New York, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 92
Pages: 1021–1022

Head Matter:
In the Matter of Thomas J. Mulvaney, Petitioner, v Thomas P. DiNapoli, as Comptroller of the State of New York, Respondent.
[937 NYS2d 480]

Opinion:
Egan 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 DiNapoli, 56 AD3d 936, 937 [2008]).
Rose, J.R, Malone Jr., Stein and McCarthy, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, without costs, and petition dismissed.