New Examination Ordered after Judge Questions Department's Relationship with Doctor
-Healy v. Scopetta, et. al., Civ. Index No. 35501/05 (Kings County Sup Ct, June 6, 2006),
In Healy, a firefighter injured his ankle and was referred, by the FDNY, to Dr. Dalavagas. Upon the denial of his disability pension, which was mostly reliant on the opinion of Dr. Dalavagas, the firefighter brought an Article 78 proceeding petitioning the State to order the Fire Department to reevaluate his application for a disability pension. The Honorable Bernadette Bayne, following a lengthy debate regarding the Fire Department'ss usage of the same handful of independent consultants and the consistency with which their opinions contradict those of multiple outside specialists and FDNY doctors, issued a bench decision sending the case to back to the Fire Department for a more appropriate review, which is to include an outside consultant other than Dr. Dalavagas. Dr. Dalavagas is a consistently used independent consultant. During the oral arguments it was noted that this law firm, Jeffrey L. Goldberg, P.C., has requested information, under the Freedom of Information Law, regarding the FDNY's financial relationship with and the determinations of the independent medical consultants but has been ignored and mislead.
FDNY's Medical Board Ordered to Reevaluate Disability Retirement Application using All Evidence
-Ryan v. Board of Trustees, Civ. Index No. 05-35500 (Kings Sup. Ct. May 31, 2006)
Recently, Jeffrey L. Goldberg, P.C. successfully argued and won Ryan v. Board of Trustees. In Ryan, a fireman and former tri-athlete, who developed severe breathing problems following his participation in the rescue and recovery efforts during and after the September 11th terrorist attacks, was denied an Accident Disability Retirement pension despite overwhelming evidence of his inability to do full fire duty. In his decision, the Honorable Leon Ruchelsman declared, it is clear from the record that the 1-B Medical Board [the doctor?s who recommend the denial or acceptance of Accident Disability Retirement pension applications] considered only those test and reports that supported its denial and ignored those tests and reports that contradicted its position. The matter was sent back to the 1-B Medical Board so the doctors could take into account all medical evidence and perform a legally satisfactory review.