Claim of Mazur v. Consolidated Carpentry, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Mazur v. Consolidated Carpentry, Inc.

73 A.D.2d 738, 423 N.Y.S.2d 281, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14812

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

DecidedDecember 13, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 73 A.D.2d 738 (Claim of Mazur v. Consolidated Carpentry, Inc.) 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 Mazur v. Consolidated Carpentry, Inc., 73 A.D.2d 738, 423 N.Y.S.2d 281, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14812 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed November 14, 1978, which affirmed a referee’s decision finding that the employer did not have knowledge and that subdivision 8 of section 15 of the Workers’ Compensation Law did not apply. The board found: "based on the testimony of the employer and the claimant, that the employer did not have sufficient knowledge that claimant had a back condition, or a good faith belief in its permanency.” There is substantial evidence to sustain the determination of the board. The resolution of questions of credibility and weight of the evidence are for the board (Matter of Milner v Country Developers, 43 AD 2d 595). Decision affirmed, with costs to the Special Disability Fund against the employer and its insurance carrier. Sweeney, J. P., Main, Mikoll and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

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 November 14, 1978, which affirmed a referee’s decision finding that the employer did not have knowledge and that subdivision 8 of section 15 of the Workers’ Compensation Law did not apply. The board found: "based on the testimony of the employer and the claimant, that the employer did not have sufficient knowledge that claimant had a back condition, or a good faith belief in its permanency.” There is substantial evidence to sustain the determination of the board. The resolution of questions of credibility and weight of the evidence are for the board (Matter of Milner v Country Developers, 43 AD 2d 595). Decision affirmed, with costs to the Special Disability Fund against the employer and its insurance carrier. Sweeney, J. P., Main, Mikoll and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

73 A.D.2d 738, 423 N.Y.S.2d 281, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14812, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-mazur-v-consolidated-carpentry-inc-nyappdiv-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack