Opinion
April 18, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garry, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
It is well settled that when there is a tie vote of the Board of Trustees of the New York City Fire Department in determining whether accident disability retirement is appropriate, the Board of Trustees must retire the applicant on an ordinary disability pension (see, Matter of City of New York v Schoeck, 294 N.Y. 559), and the Board's decision can be set aside on judicial review only if it can be determined as a matter of law on the record that the disability was a natural and proximate result of a service-related accident (see, Matter of Flynn v Board of Trustees, 201 A.D.2d 730; see also, Matter of Causarano v Board of Trustees, 178 A.D.2d 474; Matter of Canfora v Board of Trustees, 60 N.Y.2d 347).
Contrary to the petitioner's contention, the determination under review was not arbitrary or capricious; rather, the determination was based upon a comprehensive review of this matter by the Medical Board and the Board of Trustees (see, Matter of Bartsch v Board of Trustees, 142 A.D.2d 577). There was substantial medical evidence that the petitioner's disabling back condition was of nontraumatic origin (see, Matter of Russo v Board of Trustees, 143 A.D.2d 674, 676).
Further, contrary to the petitioner's contention, the record does not indicate that the Board of Trustees failed to consider whether his line of duty injuries precipitated the development of latent injuries, and hence, his disabilities (cf., Matter of Tobin v Steisel, 64 N.Y.2d 254). Thus, the petitioner has not met his burden of proving a causal connection, as a matter of law, between a line of duty accident and his disabling condition (see, Matter of Scotto v Board of Trustees, 76 A.D.2d 774, 775, affd 54 N.Y.2d 918; see also, Matter of Nicolosi v Board of Trustees, 198 A.D.2d 282). Thompson, J.P., Rosenblatt, Ritter and Santucci, JJ., concur.