Claim of Bathrick v. New York State Department of Transportation

298 A.D.2d 814, 748 N.Y.S.2d 709, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10364
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 31, 2002·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Mugglin, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed July 19, 2001, which ruled that the Workers’ Compensation Law Judge properly directed depositions of medical witnesses.

Claimant is seeking workers’ compensation benefits as the result of a causally related injury to his right foot. In order to resolve conflicting medical opinions concerning claimant’s degree of permanent loss of use of the injured foot, the Workers’ Compensation Law Judge ordered that oral depositions be taken of the medical witnesses. On review, the Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed the decision of the Workers’ Compensation Law Judge, finding that directing depositions was an appropriate use of discretion designed to speed up the adjudicatory process and make efficient use of the hearing calendar. Claimant appeals contending, inter alia, that directing depositions of medical witnesses constitutes a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the State and Federal Constitutions.

Since the decision of the Board constitutes an interlocutory order which neither disposes of a substantive issue nor involves a threshold legal issue, this appeal must be dismissed (see Matter of Bush v Beltrone Constr., 289 AD2d 722; Matter of Paiz v Coastal Pipeline Prods. Corp., 289 AD2d 846; Matter of Salerno v Newsday, Inc., 266 AD2d 600). We have recently held that a decision involving the manner of presentation of medical witness testimony constitutes such an interlocutory ruling (see Matter of Montanaro v Quay & Sons, 293 AD2d 919).

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs.

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

Claim of Bathrick v. New York State Department of Transportation, 298 A.D.2d 814, 748 N.Y.S.2d 709, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10364 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

298 A.D.2d 814 (Claim of Bathrick v. New York State Department of Transportation) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State of New York v. Moore
2020 NY Slip Op 8 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Elwell v. Shumaker
2018 NY Slip Op 722 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Miller v. Moore
101 A.D.3d 1510 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Adamec v. Mueller
94 A.D.3d 1212 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Claim of Sawyer v. Orange Motors
24 A.D.3d 1117 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Church v. New York State Thruway Authority
16 A.D.3d 808 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Minotti v. Larkin
9 A.D.3d 699 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)