Claim of Bruman v. Horn & Hardart Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Bruman v. Horn & Hardart Co.

5 A.D.2d 895, 170 N.Y.S.2d 857, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6703

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

DecidedMarch 5, 1958

StatusPublished

This text of 5 A.D.2d 895 (Claim of Bruman v. Horn & Hardart 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 Bruman v. Horn & Hardart Co., 5 A.D.2d 895, 170 N.Y.S.2d 857, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6703 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the employer and carrier from an award of disability compensation. While lifting a heavy picnic table over a bank on August 9, 1952, claimant sustained a severe back sprain. In May, 1953, claimant complained of pain in the left kidney region. On August 8, 1953, he was hospitalized for acute prostatitis. Appellants do not dispute the original accident. They contend, however, that there is no evidence that the disability due to the kidney condition and prostatitis is causally related to the accident. Claimant’s attending physician, in both reports andi testimony, expressed an unequivocal opinion that both conditions were the result of the accident, and explained his reasons for such an opinion. We think the board could accept the testimony of the attending physician, and that the award is supported by substantial evidence. Award affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board.

Foster, P. J., Bergan, Coon and Gibson, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the employer and carrier from an award of disability compensation. While lifting a heavy picnic table over a bank on August 9, 1952, claimant sustained a severe back sprain. In May, 1953, claimant complained of pain in the left kidney region. On August 8, 1953, he was hospitalized for acute prostatitis. Appellants do not dispute the original accident. They contend, however, that there is no evidence that the disability due to the kidney condition and prostatitis is causally related to the accident. Claimant’s attending physician, in both reports andi testimony, expressed an unequivocal opinion that both conditions were the result of the accident, and explained his reasons for such an opinion. We think the board could accept the testimony of the attending physician, and that the award is supported by substantial evidence. Award affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board.

Foster, P. J., Bergan, Coon and Gibson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 A.D.2d 895, 170 N.Y.S.2d 857, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6703, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-bruman-v-horn-hardart-co-nyappdiv-1958.