Claim of Jones v. New York State Department of Correction
This text of 35 A.D.3d 1025 (Claim of Jones v. New York State Department of Correction) 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
Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed January 24, 2005, which ruled that claimant did not sustain a causally related consequential injury and denied her claim for workers’ compensation benefits.
On September 19, 1998, claimant, a bus driver for the New York City Department of Correction, suffered work-related injuries to her right shoulder and back and received workers’ compensation benefits.
We affirm. The Board is entitled to make its own factual findings and is not bound by the credibility determinations of a WCLJ (see Matter of Ortiz v Five Points Correctional Facility, 307 AD2d 634, 635 [2003]). Here, the Board found testimony of the self-insured employer’s medical consultant to be more cred[1026]*1026ible than that of claimant’s physician. The consultant found no shoulder abnormalities and stated that claimant’s left shoulder pain “was not caused by the injury [she sustained in September 1998].” The Board found claimant’s physician to be less credible because his records were incomplete, his testimony was evasive, he was unaware of many details of claimant’s personal and medical history and his diagnosis was partly based on “common sense.” Inasmuch as the Board has authority to resolve conflicting medical evidence (see Matter of Neal v Blue Circle Cement, 28 AD3d 1049, 1049-1050 [2006]), and its decision is supported by substantial evidence, we find no basis upon which to disturb it (see Matter of Senecal v Bendix, 29 AD3d 1232, 1233 [2006]).
Cardona, P.J., Her cure, Spain and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
Although the caption in this case would seemingly indicate that claimant was an employee of the New York State Department of Correction, she actually worked for the New York City Department of Correction.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
35 A.D.3d 1025, 825 N.Y.S.2d 316, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-jones-v-new-york-state-department-of-correction-nyappdiv-2006.