Claim of Capalbo v. Stone & Webster Construction Services
This text of 91 A.D.3d 1263 (Claim of Capalbo v. Stone & Webster Construction Services) 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.
Opinion
We affirm. The merits of the Board’s July 2010 decision are [1264]*1264not properly before this Court, as the carrier failed to appeal that decision and appealed only from the Board’s denial of its request for full Board review and/or reconsideration (see Matter of Dipippo v Accurate Signs & Awnings, 88 AD3d 1044, 1045 [2011]; Matter of Maqsood v McRoberts Protective Agency, 79 AD3d 1547 [2010], lv dismissed 16 NY3d 871 [2011]). Our analysis is therefore limited to deciding whether the Board’s denial was an abuse of discretion or otherwise arbitrary and capricious (see Matter of Siliverdis v Sea Breeze Servs. Corp., 82 AD3d 1459, 1460 [2011]; Matter of Maqsood v McRoberts Protective Agency, 79 AD3d at 1547). We decline to disturb the Board’s decision, as the record establishes that it addressed all relevant issues and the carrier did not present any evidence that was previously unavailable (see Matter of Maqsood v McRoberts Protective Agency, 79 AD3d at 1547; Matter of Gentile v Sovereign Motor Cars, 77 AD3d 1027, 1028 [2010], lv dismissed 16 NY3d 824 [2011]).
Peters, J.P., Malone Jr., Stein and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, with costs to claimant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
91 A.D.3d 1263, 936 N.Y.2d 795, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-capalbo-v-stone-webster-construction-services-nyappdiv-2012.