Claim of Komisar v. Witco Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Komisar v. Witco Corp.

206 A.D.2d 570, 615 N.Y.S.2d 1016, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7190

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

DecidedJuly 7, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 206 A.D.2d 570 (Claim of Komisar v. Witco Corp.) 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 Komisar v. Witco Corp., 206 A.D.2d 570, 615 N.Y.S.2d 1016, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7190 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed October 16, 1992, which ruled that claimant sustained an occupational disease.

Claimant worked for the employer, a manufacturer of rubber-coated products, for approximately 30 years mixing latex with other chemicals and materials. Expert medical testimony indicated that claimant’s impairment was attributable to his chronic exposure to chemicals at his place of employment. We find that this testimony provides substantial evidence to support the Board’s decision that claimant suffered an occupational disease.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III, Weiss and Yesawich Jr., 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

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed October 16, 1992, which ruled that claimant sustained an occupational disease.

Claimant worked for the employer, a manufacturer of rubber-coated products, for approximately 30 years mixing latex with other chemicals and materials. Expert medical testimony indicated that claimant’s impairment was attributable to his chronic exposure to chemicals at his place of employment. We find that this testimony provides substantial evidence to support the Board’s decision that claimant suffered an occupational disease.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III, Weiss and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

206 A.D.2d 570, 615 N.Y.S.2d 1016, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7190, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-komisar-v-witco-corp-nyappdiv-1994.