Claim of Manbeck v. Manbeck Machinery Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Manbeck v. Manbeck Machinery Co.

54 A.D.2d 816, 387 N.Y.S.2d 922, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14513

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

DecidedOctober 28, 1976

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 54 A.D.2d 816 (Claim of Manbeck v. Manbeck Machinery 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 Manbeck v. Manbeck Machinery Co., 54 A.D.2d 816, 387 N.Y.S.2d 922, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14513 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeals from decisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, filed December 12, 1974, November 17, 1975 and April 15, 1976. On March 18, 1970 the deceased employee herein was concededly involved in a compensable automobile accident, and he thereafter died of a cerebral hemorrhage on October 22, 1970. The board awarded claimant death benefits after finding that her deceased husband’s death was causally related to his industrial accident, and the sole question presented on this appeal is whether substantial evidence supports the board’s determination that the decedent’s demise was causally related to aggravation of his underlying hypertensive cerebral vascular disease resulting from his industrial accident. We find that the board’s decision must be affirmed because substantial medical evidence in the record, including both oral testimony and documentary evidence, supports its determination as to causality, and any conflict in the expert opinions presented were for the board to resolve (cf. Matter of Miller v Dimon & Son, 45 AD2d 788). Decisions affirmed, with costs to respondents filing briefs. Sweeney, J. P., Main, Larkin, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

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

Appeals from decisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, filed December 12, 1974, November 17, 1975 and April 15, 1976. On March 18, 1970 the deceased employee herein was concededly involved in a compensable automobile accident, and he thereafter died of a cerebral hemorrhage on October 22, 1970. The board awarded claimant death benefits after finding that her deceased husband’s death was causally related to his industrial accident, and the sole question presented on this appeal is whether substantial evidence supports the board’s determination that the decedent’s demise was causally related to aggravation of his underlying hypertensive cerebral vascular disease resulting from his industrial accident. We find that the board’s decision must be affirmed because substantial medical evidence in the record, including both oral testimony and documentary evidence, supports its determination as to causality, and any conflict in the expert opinions presented were for the board to resolve (cf. Matter of Miller v Dimon & Son, 45 AD2d 788). Decisions affirmed, with costs to respondents filing briefs. Sweeney, J. P., Main, Larkin, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 A.D.2d 816, 387 N.Y.S.2d 922, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14513, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-manbeck-v-manbeck-machinery-co-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack