Claim of Connelly v. Connelly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Connelly v. Connelly

241 A.D.2d 572, 660 N.Y.S.2d 76, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7246

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

DecidedJuly 3, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 241 A.D.2d 572 (Claim of Connelly v. Connelly) 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 Connelly v. Connelly, 241 A.D.2d 572, 660 N.Y.S.2d 76, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7246 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Crew III, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed November 2, 1995, which ruled that the death of claimant’s decedent was not causally related to his employment and denied the claim for workers’ compensation benefits.

By decision filed November 2, 1995, the Workers’ Compensation Board determined that the death of claimant’s decedent was not causally related to his employment as an attorney specializing in workers’ compensation cases and, accordingly, denied claimant’s application for workers’ compensation benefits. Claimant now appeals, contending that the Board’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence. We cannot agree.

The record establishes that at the time of his death, decedent was 55 years old and, at six feet tall, weighed in excess of 300 [573]*573pounds. Decedent apparently had a lengthy history of hypertension and, only four days before his death, had been urged by his physician to enter a hospital due to his then dangerously high blood pressure. Although the medical experts who testified at the hearing generally were in agreement as to the cause of death, which was attributed to an acute vascular event or stroke, they parted company with respect to whether the stroke was the direct result of work-related stress. In this regard, claimant’s experts testified that decedent’s death indeed was the direct result of work-related stress, while the carrier’s expert took the position that it was decedent’s untreated obesity and hypertension that ultimately led to his demise. As this conflicting medical testimony and the weight to be accorded it was a matter for the Board to resolve, we cannot say that its decision is not supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Kroeger v New York State Workers’ Compensation Bd., 222 AD2d 912, lv denied 88 NY2d 801). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been examined and found to be lacking in merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, White and Peters, 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

Crew III, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed November 2, 1995, which ruled that the death of claimant’s decedent was not causally related to his employment and denied the claim for workers’ compensation benefits.

By decision filed November 2, 1995, the Workers’ Compensation Board determined that the death of claimant’s decedent was not causally related to his employment as an attorney specializing in workers’ compensation cases and, accordingly, denied claimant’s application for workers’ compensation benefits. Claimant now appeals, contending that the Board’s decision is not supported by substantial evidence. We cannot agree.

The record establishes that at the time of his death, decedent was 55 years old and, at six feet tall, weighed in excess of 300 [573]*573pounds. Decedent apparently had a lengthy history of hypertension and, only four days before his death, had been urged by his physician to enter a hospital due to his then dangerously high blood pressure. Although the medical experts who testified at the hearing generally were in agreement as to the cause of death, which was attributed to an acute vascular event or stroke, they parted company with respect to whether the stroke was the direct result of work-related stress. In this regard, claimant’s experts testified that decedent’s death indeed was the direct result of work-related stress, while the carrier’s expert took the position that it was decedent’s untreated obesity and hypertension that ultimately led to his demise. As this conflicting medical testimony and the weight to be accorded it was a matter for the Board to resolve, we cannot say that its decision is not supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Kroeger v New York State Workers’ Compensation Bd., 222 AD2d 912, lv denied 88 NY2d 801). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been examined and found to be lacking in merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, White and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

241 A.D.2d 572, 660 N.Y.S.2d 76, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7246, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-connelly-v-connelly-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack