Claim of Besner v. Walter Kidde Nuclear Laboratory

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Besner v. Walter Kidde Nuclear Laboratory

24 A.D.2d 1045, 265 N.Y.S.2d 312, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2769

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 20, 1965

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 24 A.D.2d 1045 (Claim of Besner v. Walter Kidde Nuclear Laboratory) 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 Besner v. Walter Kidde Nuclear Laboratory, 24 A.D.2d 1045, 265 N.Y.S.2d 312, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2769 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Aulisi, J.

Appeal from a decision awarding benefits for death from acute myeloblastie leukemia, found due to exposure to radiation. The case was before us on a prior appeal (18 A D 2d 952). The record discloses that decedent was exposed to radiation for a substantial part of two periods and also at other times in various amounts. The testimony of the medical experts is emphatic that there is really no “ threshold ” or “ safe ” dosage of radiation because at the present stage of scientific knowledge it cannot be ascertained exactly what effects radiation has on the human body. It is also admitted that each individual reacts differently to exposure to radiation. The award is supported by substantial evidence and by the presumptions (Workmen’s Compensation Law, § 3, subd. 2; § 47), especially so in view of decedent’s good health prior to his employment. Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ., concur.

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

Aulisi, J.

Appeal from a decision awarding benefits for death from acute myeloblastie leukemia, found due to exposure to radiation. The case was before us on a prior appeal (18 A D 2d 952). The record discloses that decedent was exposed to radiation for a substantial part of two periods and also at other times in various amounts. The testimony of the medical experts is emphatic that there is really no “ threshold ” or “ safe ” dosage of radiation because at the present stage of scientific knowledge it cannot be ascertained exactly what effects radiation has on the human body. It is also admitted that each individual reacts differently to exposure to radiation. The award is supported by substantial evidence and by the presumptions (Workmen’s Compensation Law, § 3, subd. 2; § 47), especially so in view of decedent’s good health prior to his employment. Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 1045, 265 N.Y.S.2d 312, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2769, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-besner-v-walter-kidde-nuclear-laboratory-nyappdiv-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack