Claim of Kuklinski v. Sentry Communications

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Kuklinski v. Sentry Communications

78 A.D.2d 760, 432 N.Y.S.2d 749, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13312

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

DecidedOctober 30, 1980

StatusPublished

This text of 78 A.D.2d 760 (Claim of Kuklinski v. Sentry Communications) 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 Kuklinski v. Sentry Communications, 78 A.D.2d 760, 432 N.Y.S.2d 749, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13312 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed October 3, 1979, affirming a referee’s decision finding that the claimant’s accidental injuries of June 18, 1977 arose out of and in the course of his employment. The board found: "based on the evidence and testimony that the accidental injuries were not due solely to intoxication [and that] Claimant had spent the night attending shows at the direction of his employer and he sustained injuries when his car struck a utility pole.” There is substantial evidence to sustain the determination of the board. Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workers’ Compensation Board against the employer and its insurance carrier. Mahoney, P. J., Greenblott, Main and Mikoll, JJ., concur; Staley, Jr., J., not taking part.

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 3, 1979, affirming a referee’s decision finding that the claimant’s accidental injuries of June 18, 1977 arose out of and in the course of his employment. The board found: "based on the evidence and testimony that the accidental injuries were not due solely to intoxication [and that] Claimant had spent the night attending shows at the direction of his employer and he sustained injuries when his car struck a utility pole.” There is substantial evidence to sustain the determination of the board. Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workers’ Compensation Board against the employer and its insurance carrier. Mahoney, P. J., Greenblott, Main and Mikoll, JJ., concur; Staley, Jr., J., not taking part.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

78 A.D.2d 760, 432 N.Y.S.2d 749, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13312, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-kuklinski-v-sentry-communications-nyappdiv-1980.