Summary
holding that the court does not attach any legal significance to the field that the members of the medical board practice, but rely on the fact that "qualified physicians are able to make an informed medical judgment on the basis of information submitted to them, including the opinions of specialists in area other than their own."
Summary of this case from IN RE BRADY v. BD OF TR OF NYC POLICE PENSION FUNDOpinion
Argued May 6, 1982
Decided June 8, 1982
Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, HERBERT SHAPIRO, J.
Kenneth E. Gordon and Murray A. Gordon for appellant.
Frederick A.O. Schwarz, Jr., Corporation Counsel ( Ronald E. Sternberg and Leonard Koerner of counsel), for respondents.
MEMORANDUM.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
We agree with the majority at the Appellate Division that the medical board was not arbitrary or capricious in its unanimous conclusion that appellant had failed to sustain his burden of establishing a causal connection between the incident of July 10, 1975 and his disabling cataracts. The board explicated the rationale behind its decision, that decision was warranted by the evidence before the board, and, the issue of causation being one for medical judgment, the board of trustees was entitled to rely on the opinion of the medical board.
Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER concur.
Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.