Claim of Guerriera v. Universal Terminal Stevedore Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Guerriera v. Universal Terminal Stevedore Co.

9 A.D.2d 984, 194 N.Y.S.2d 566, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5300

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

DecidedDecember 31, 1959

StatusPublished

This text of 9 A.D.2d 984 (Claim of Guerriera v. Universal Terminal Stevedore 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 Guerriera v. Universal Terminal Stevedore Co., 9 A.D.2d 984, 194 N.Y.S.2d 566, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5300 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Claimant is a longshoreman and in the course of his work a metal latch swung down and struck his head. He subsequently suffered cataracts in both eyes. There is medical opinion in the record that these are traumatic cataracts attributable to the blow on the head. There is, however, other medical opinion that the eye condition was not in this instance due to the blow on the head and expressing the further opinion that development of cataracts having such a causation was so rare that on review of the medical literature the physician had not been able to find a report of such a ease. The board, therefore, was justified in finding no association between the industrial accident and the condition of the eyes. Decision unanimously affirmed, without costs. Present ■ — Bergan, J. P., Coon, Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ.

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

Appeal from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Claimant is a longshoreman and in the course of his work a metal latch swung down and struck his head. He subsequently suffered cataracts in both eyes. There is medical opinion in the record that these are traumatic cataracts attributable to the blow on the head. There is, however, other medical opinion that the eye condition was not in this instance due to the blow on the head and expressing the further opinion that development of cataracts having such a causation was so rare that on review of the medical literature the physician had not been able to find a report of such a ease. The board, therefore, was justified in finding no association between the industrial accident and the condition of the eyes. Decision unanimously affirmed, without costs. Present ■ — Bergan, J. P., Coon, Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 A.D.2d 984, 194 N.Y.S.2d 566, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5300, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-guerriera-v-universal-terminal-stevedore-co-nyappdiv-1959.