Balk v. Austin Ford Logan, Inc.

221 A.D.2d 795, 633 N.Y.S.2d 675, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11788
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 16, 1995
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 221 A.D.2d 795 (Balk v. Austin Ford Logan, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Balk v. Austin Ford Logan, Inc., 221 A.D.2d 795, 633 N.Y.S.2d 675, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11788 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed October 17, 1994, which ruled that claimant’s decedent sustained an accident solely due to intoxication and denied claimant’s claim for workers’ compensation benefits.

Decedent was killed in an automobile accident while returning to her home from a restaurant after making a sales call. During the extended period she and her client were at the restaurant, they consumed a significant number of alcoholic beverages. Claimant, decedent’s husband, filed an application for workers’ compensation benefits which was denied on the basis that "decedent’s accident was solely the result of intoxication”. Upon review of the record, we find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision. The testimony of the eyewitnesses to the accident and the police investigator, as well as the medical evidence, established that alcohol was the [796]*796underlying cause of the accident; there was also testimony that alcohol was a factor in decedent’s high rate of speed. Moreover, no evidence was presented that wet pavement contributed to the accident. Accordingly, the Board’s decision must be upheld.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Casey and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Finchum v. Colaiacomo
55 A.D.3d 1084 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Claim of Smith v. LSI Lighting Services
291 A.D.2d 606 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Claim of Dawson v. S.P.F. Carting Co.
259 A.D.2d 910 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Claim of Purcell v. American SIP Corp.
248 A.D.2d 844 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
221 A.D.2d 795, 633 N.Y.S.2d 675, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11788, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/balk-v-austin-ford-logan-inc-nyappdiv-1995.