From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Dutra v. Village of Port Chester

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 4, 1990
162 A.D.2d 452 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

June 4, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (West, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

We find that there is substantial evidence in this record to support the determination by the respondent village that the petitioner's disability was not the result of an injury incurred during the performance of his duties as a police officer (see generally, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176). Although the evidence provided by the parties' respective medical experts was conflicting, the duty of weighing that evidence and making a choice among conflicting versions rested with the agency involved, not with the court (see, Matter of Berenhaus v. Ward, 70 N.Y.2d 436; Matter of Moorehead v. New York City Tr. Auth., 147 A.D.2d 569; Matter of Butler v. Regan, 134 A.D.2d 698).

We find that the petitioner's remaining contention is without merit. Kooper, J.P., Harwood, Balletta and Miller, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Dutra v. Village of Port Chester

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 4, 1990
162 A.D.2d 452 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Matter of Dutra v. Village of Port Chester

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of WILLIAM M. DUTRA, Appellant, v. VILLAGE OF PORT CHESTER…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jun 4, 1990

Citations

162 A.D.2d 452 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Citing Cases

Izzo v. Vecchio

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the petition is dismissed, on the merits, with costs. We…

1 Toms Point Lane Corp. v. N.Y. State Div. of Human Rights

There is sufficient evidence that having a dog would affirmatively enhance Hough's quality of life by…