Court Opinion

ID: 9532329
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:20:22.384317+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:28:44.522682
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM:
Petitioner challenges respondent’s decision denying her request for disability retirement under D.C.Code 1973, §§ 4-526, -527. Finding substantial evidence in the record to support respondent’s determination, and no error of law having been committed, we affirm.
The Board found that petitioner, who presented evidence of a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis, suffered “some limiting disability,” but concluded that she was not permanently disabled for useful and efficient service in the grade or class of position last occupied by her as a member of the United States Park Police.* See D.C.Code 1973, § 4-521(2). This conclusion is supported by the expert medical testimony before the Board and by substantial evidence in the record considered as a whole. See D.C.Code 1973, § 1-1510(3)(E). Accordingly, it is not our role to disturb the Board’s decision.

Affirmed.

 Petitioner previously had sustained an ankle injury and originally sought disability retirement on that basis, which was denied.