We confirm. An applicant for accidental or State Police disability retirement benefits bears the burden of establishing, among other things, "that he or she is permanently incapacitated from performing his or her regular job duties" (Matter ofTerry v. New York State Comptroller, 39 A.D.3d 1116, 1116, 835 N.Y.S.2d 484 [2007] ; see Matter ofSolarino v. DiNapoli, 171 A.D.3d 1434, 1435, 98 N.Y.S.3d 674 [2019] ; Matter ofRawson v. DiNapoli, 150 A.D.3d 1606, 1606, 55 N.Y.S.3d 799 [2017] ). The Comptroller is vested with "the authority to resolve conflicts in medical evidence and to credit the opinion of one expert over that of another, so long as the credited expert provides an ‘articulated, rational and fact-based opinion, founded upon a physical examination and review of relevant medical reports and records’ " ( Matter of Hill v. New York State & Local Retirement Sys., 295 A.D.2d 802, 802, 744 N.Y.S.2d 536 [2002], quoting Matter of Buczynski v. New York State & Local Empls. Retirement Sys., 291 A.D.2d 630, 630, 737 N.Y.S.2d 409 [2002] ; see Matter ofTerry v. New York State Comptroller, 39 A.D.3d at 1117, 835 N.Y.S.2d 484 ). Where the Comptroller's determination is supported by substantial evidence, it will be sustained (see Matter ofAnderson v. DiNapoli, 126 A.D.3d 1278, 1279, 6 N.Y.S.3d 189 [2015] ;
Following a hearing and redetermination, the Hearing Officer reached the same conclusion. The Comptroller upheld the Hearing Officer's decision, prompting petitioner to commence this CPLR article 78 proceeding to challenge that determination. "To receive accidental disability retirement benefits, a petitioner has the burden to establish that he or she is permanently incapacitated from performing his or her regular job duties" ( Matter of Terry v New York State Comptroller, 39 AD3d 1116, 1116 [citation omitted]; see Matter of Stern v DiNapoli, 57 AD3d 1076, 1077; Matter of Amedio v Hevesi, 45 AD3d 1004, 1005, appeal dismissed 10 NY3d 744). Here, both petitioner and the Retirement System elected to proceed on documentary evidence.
We confirm. An applicant for disability retirement benefits bears the burden of establishing that he or she is permanently incapacitated from the performance of his or her job duties ( see Matter of Loysen v. New York State & Local Retirement Sys., 100 A.D.3d 1168, 1169, 953 N.Y.S.2d 734 [2012] ). Here, although petitioner submitted medical evidence of a disability, such proof did not address the issue of permanency ( see Matter of Terry v. New York State Comptroller, 39 A.D.3d 1116, 1117, 835 N.Y.S.2d 484 [2007] ). Indeed, the only medical evidence bearing upon the question of permanent incapacity was a report from an independent medical examiner, who—after examining petitioner and reviewing her medical file—opined that she was not permanently incapacitated from performing the duties of a psychologist from an orthopedic point of view. Accordingly, we find substantial evidence to support the Comptroller's determination ( see Matter of Mulvaney v. DiNapoli, 92 A.D.3d 1021, 1021, 937 N.Y.S.2d 480 [2012] ).
The Comptroller made a supplemental finding of fact, but upheld the Hearing Officer's decision, prompting this CPLR article 78 proceeding. In order to be eligible to receive disability retirement benefits, a petitioner must demonstrate, among other things, that he or she is "`permanently incapacitated from performing his or her regular job duties'" ( Matter of Scheuring v New York State Comptroller, 32 AD3d 1127, 1128, quoting Matter of Liber v McCall, 6 AD3d 950, 950; see Matter of Terry v New York State Comptroller, 39 AD3d 1116, 1116). Moreover, where, as here, the evidence provided by medical experts is conflicting, the Comptroller has "the authority 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; see Matter of Clorofilla v Hevesi, 38 AD3d 1126, 1126-1127).
Respondent subsequently issued a final decision denying the application, prompting the commencement of this CPLR article 78 proceeding. To receive accidental disability retirement benefits, petitioner was required to demonstrate, among other things, his permanent incapacity from "`performing his . . . regular job duties'" ( Matter of Scheuring v New York State Comptroller, 32 AD3d 1127, 1127-1128, quoting Matter of Liber v McCall, 6 AD3d 950, 950; see Matter of Terry v New York State Comptroller, 39 AD3d 1116, 1116). Where, as here, the evidence from the medical experts is conflicting, respondent has "the authority to resolve [such] conflicts . . . 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; see Matter of Clorofilla v Hevesi, 38 AD3d 1126, 1126).