Opinion
July 24, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vinik, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Where conflicting evidence and medical reports are presented before the Medical Board of the New York City Fire Department Article 1-B Pension Fund, it is solely within the province of the Medical Board and the Board of Trustees to resolve the conflict ( see, Matter of Manza v. Malcolm, 44 A.D.2d 794). The Medical Board's determination that the petitioner had not established that he was permanently disabled under either the Lung Bill (Administrative Code of City of New York § 13-354) or the Heart Bill (General Municipal Law § 207-k) was based upon credible evidence. Thus, the Board of Trustees' determination in reliance upon the Medical Board's recommendation was not arbitrary or capricious ( see, Matter of Manza v. Malcolm, supra; Matter of Bartsch v. Board of Trustees, 142 A.D.2d 577). It is well settled that the courts cannot weigh the medical evidence or substitute their own judgment for that of the Medical Board ( see, Matter of Brady v. City of New York, 22 N.Y.2d 601; Matter of Appleby v Herkommer, 165 A.D.2d 727). The Supreme Court properly upheld the Board's determination ( see, Nicolosi v. Board of Trustees, 198 A.D.2d 282; Matter of Shedd v. Board of Trustees, 177 A.D.2d 632). Sullivan, J.P., O'Brien, Thompson and Santucci, JJ., concur.