Claim of Nat Trust v. Webster Baking Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Nat Trust v. Webster Baking Co.

25 A.D.2d 807, 269 N.Y.S.2d 326, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4408

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

DecidedApril 29, 1966

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 25 A.D.2d 807 (Claim of Nat Trust v. Webster Baking 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 Nat Trust v. Webster Baking Co., 25 A.D.2d 807, 269 N.Y.S.2d 326, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4408 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Reynolds, J.

Appeal by the employer and its carrier from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board awarding claimant benefits for reduced earnings. On July 5, 1963 claimant, a bakery route salesman, sustained a lumbo sacral sprain while lifting a box of baked goods. Appellants do not dispute that disability resulted from this injury. They contend, however, that [808]*808claimant’s back condition, apart from the two weeks immediately following the accident, has bad no effect upon bis earnings, and instead would attribute any reduction to economic factors. A reduction in earnings due solely to economic conditions is not compensable (Matter of Haynos v. American Brass Co., 8 A D 2d 870). However, if the disability did, in fact, cause or contribute to reduce earnings an award must be made (Matter of Croce v. Ford Motor Co., 307 N. Y. 125). The resolution of this issue in a given case is factual and thus the board’s determination if based on substantial evidence is not reviewable (see Matter of Connor v. Bethlehem Steel Co., 11 A D 2d 578). Here claimant while conceding that a bakery route business increases and decreased periodically as a matter of course, testified that since the accident he had lost business which he could not even attempt to regain or replace because he was physically unable to handle more business and appellants in turn offered evidence to establish that the loss of business in claimant’s territory was due solely to increased competition. On the present record we cannot disturb the board’s resolution of these conflicting positions. Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board.

Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Taylor and Aulisi, JJ., concur.

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

Reynolds, J.

Appeal by the employer and its carrier from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board awarding claimant benefits for reduced earnings. On July 5, 1963 claimant, a bakery route salesman, sustained a lumbo sacral sprain while lifting a box of baked goods. Appellants do not dispute that disability resulted from this injury. They contend, however, that [808]*808claimant’s back condition, apart from the two weeks immediately following the accident, has bad no effect upon bis earnings, and instead would attribute any reduction to economic factors. A reduction in earnings due solely to economic conditions is not compensable (Matter of Haynos v. American Brass Co., 8 A D 2d 870). However, if the disability did, in fact, cause or contribute to reduce earnings an award must be made (Matter of Croce v. Ford Motor Co., 307 N. Y. 125). The resolution of this issue in a given case is factual and thus the board’s determination if based on substantial evidence is not reviewable (see Matter of Connor v. Bethlehem Steel Co., 11 A D 2d 578). Here claimant while conceding that a bakery route business increases and decreased periodically as a matter of course, testified that since the accident he had lost business which he could not even attempt to regain or replace because he was physically unable to handle more business and appellants in turn offered evidence to establish that the loss of business in claimant’s territory was due solely to increased competition. On the present record we cannot disturb the board’s resolution of these conflicting positions. Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board.

Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Taylor and Aulisi, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 A.D.2d 807, 269 N.Y.S.2d 326, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4408, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-nat-trust-v-webster-baking-co-nyappdiv-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack