Claim of Aquillina v. Victor Adding Machine Co.

26 A.D.2d 869, 273 N.Y.S.2d 988, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3287
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 21, 1966
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 26 A.D.2d 869 (Claim of Aquillina v. Victor Adding Machine Co.) 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
Claim of Aquillina v. Victor Adding Machine Co., 26 A.D.2d 869, 273 N.Y.S.2d 988, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3287 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Opinion

Reynolds, J.

Appeal by the employer and its insurance carrier from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board holding them solely liable for claimant’s [870]*870continuing disability. In 1955 claimant suffered an accidental injury while working for the appellant employer and subsequently in 1957 was involved in another accident while working for a different employer. Prior to the determination in the instant case claimant was found totally disabled by the Veterans’ Administration and the Social Security Administration as a result of an unrelated stomach condition. We see no requirement, however, that claimant necessarily be barred from compensation for total disability resulting from an industrial accident because he is already being awarded benefits from another agency for an unconnected disability, albeit that that disability has been found to be total also. Any incongruity in such a result must be resolved by the agencies involved and not by this court. Thus the sole issues before us here are the propriety of the board’s determinations that claimant’s present disability is causally related to the 1955 accident and to that accident alone. These determinations are factual and thus, since we find substantial medical evidence in support thereof, must be affirmed (Matter of Palermo v. Gallucci & Sons, 5 N Y 2d 529). Decision affirmed, with one bill of costs to respondents filing briefs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy and Staley, Jr., JJ., concur; Taylor, J., not voting.

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

Related

Mazor v. State, Dep't of Correction
369 A.2d 82 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1977)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
26 A.D.2d 869, 273 N.Y.S.2d 988, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3287, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-aquillina-v-victor-adding-machine-co-nyappdiv-1966.