Claim of Ignizio v. Eber Bros. & Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Ignizio v. Eber Bros. & Co.

75 A.D.2d 915

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

DecidedMay 1, 1980

StatusPublished

This text of 75 A.D.2d 915 (Claim of Ignizio v. Eber Bros. & 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 Ignizio v. Eber Bros. & Co., 75 A.D.2d 915 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed May 22, 1979, which found that claimant did not sustain a causally related disability on April 18, 1977. The board found: "The medica],' evidence, particularly the testimony of Dr. Currie and Dr. Cristo, indicates that the claimant had an underlying pre-existing diabetes and arteriosclerotic heart disease and as a result of work effort on April 18, 1977 did not sustain a myocardial infarction but his work effort that day produced an episode of angina pectoris, further claimant’s testimony indicates he has stopped work because of his condition and not because he had a causally related disability.” Substantial evidence in the record supports the determination of the board. Decision affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Greenblott, Kane, Main and Mikoll, JJ., concur.

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

from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed May 22, 1979, which found that claimant did not sustain a causally related disability on April 18, 1977. The board found: "The medica],' evidence, particularly the testimony of Dr. Currie and Dr. Cristo, indicates that the claimant had an underlying pre-existing diabetes and arteriosclerotic heart disease and as a result of work effort on April 18, 1977 did not sustain a myocardial infarction but his work effort that day produced an episode of angina pectoris, further claimant’s testimony indicates he has stopped work because of his condition and not because he had a causally related disability.” Substantial evidence in the record supports the determination of the board. Decision affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Greenblott, Kane, Main and Mikoll, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

75 A.D.2d 915, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-ignizio-v-eber-bros-co-nyappdiv-1980.