Claim of Block v. Stroheim & Romann, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Block v. Stroheim & Romann, Inc.

203 A.D.2d 833, 611 N.Y.S.2d 355, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4436

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

DecidedApril 28, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 203 A.D.2d 833 (Claim of Block v. Stroheim & Romann, 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

Claim of Block v. Stroheim & Romann, Inc., 203 A.D.2d 833, 611 N.Y.S.2d 355, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4436 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed August 10, 1992, which ruled that claimant did not sustain an accidental injury in the course of his employment and denied his claim for workers’ compensation benefits.

Claimant, who was employed as a showroom assistant for a fabric and wall covering jobber, allegedly developed acute depression as a result of his transfer from the back showroom of the employer to the front showroom, where he had to deal with less knowledgeable retail customers. Claimant subsequently ceased working and applied for workers’ compensation benefits, contending that he had suffered an accidental injury under the Workers’ Compensation Law. We find substantial evidence to support the Board’s finding that the stress created [834]*834by claimant’s job transfer was no more than that normally encountered in a work environment and therefore could not result in a compensable injury. We have considered claimant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, White, Weiss and Yesawich Jr., 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

—Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed August 10, 1992, which ruled that claimant did not sustain an accidental injury in the course of his employment and denied his claim for workers’ compensation benefits.

Claimant, who was employed as a showroom assistant for a fabric and wall covering jobber, allegedly developed acute depression as a result of his transfer from the back showroom of the employer to the front showroom, where he had to deal with less knowledgeable retail customers. Claimant subsequently ceased working and applied for workers’ compensation benefits, contending that he had suffered an accidental injury under the Workers’ Compensation Law. We find substantial evidence to support the Board’s finding that the stress created [834]*834by claimant’s job transfer was no more than that normally encountered in a work environment and therefore could not result in a compensable injury. We have considered claimant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, White, Weiss and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

203 A.D.2d 833, 611 N.Y.S.2d 355, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4436, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-block-v-stroheim-romann-inc-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack