Claim of Fabiano v. Sears

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Fabiano v. Sears

27 A.D.3d 884, 810 N.Y.S.2d 542

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

DecidedMarch 9, 2006

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 27 A.D.3d 884 (Claim of Fabiano v. Sears) 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 Fabiano v. Sears, 27 A.D.3d 884, 810 N.Y.S.2d 542 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed June 27, 2005, which awarded claimant compensation for the period from December 28, 2001 to April 25, 2003.

After the employer perfected this appeal, the Board filed an amended decision which effectively rescinded its prior determination regarding the resumption of awards and returned the case to the trial calendar to determine compensation awards subsequent to the date of claimant’s retirement. Thus, this appeal has been rendered moot (see Matter of Bathrick v New York State Dept. of Transp., 278 AD2d 704, 705 [2000]; Matter of Schultz v L. B. Smith, Inc., 90 AD2d 595, 596 [1982], lv denied 58 NY2d 604 [1983]).

Crew III, J.P., Mugglin, Rose, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, 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 June 27, 2005, which awarded claimant compensation for the period from December 28, 2001 to April 25, 2003.

After the employer perfected this appeal, the Board filed an amended decision which effectively rescinded its prior determination regarding the resumption of awards and returned the case to the trial calendar to determine compensation awards subsequent to the date of claimant’s retirement. Thus, this appeal has been rendered moot (see Matter of Bathrick v New York State Dept. of Transp., 278 AD2d 704, 705 [2000]; Matter of Schultz v L. B. Smith, Inc., 90 AD2d 595, 596 [1982], lv denied 58 NY2d 604 [1983]).

Crew III, J.P., Mugglin, Rose, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 A.D.3d 884, 810 N.Y.S.2d 542, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-fabiano-v-sears-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack