Claim of Olczyk v. Verizon New York, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Olczyk v. Verizon New York, Inc.

33 A.D.3d 1109, 822 N.Y.S.2d 338

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

DecidedOctober 19, 2006

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 33 A.D.3d 1109 (Claim of Olczyk v. Verizon New York, 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 Olczyk v. Verizon New York, Inc., 33 A.D.3d 1109, 822 N.Y.S.2d 338 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Kane, J. Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed March 22, 2005, which, inter alia, ruled that the medical reports of the independent medical examiner were properly precluded.

The self-insured employer arranged for an independent medical examiner to examine claimant. The employer’s counsel conceded at the hearing that this physician’s report was not in the Workers’ Compensation Board’s file, though an addendum to the report was filed. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge precluded the report and addendum for noncompliance with the requirements of Workers’ Compensation Law § 137, and authorized treatment for claimant. The employer appealed to the Board, which upheld the decision, resulting in this appeal.

We affirm. Because the report was not filed with the Board within 10 business days after the examination, it was properly precluded (see Workers’ Compensation Law § 137; 12 NYCRR 300.2 [d] [3], [9], [11]; accord Matter of Jarek v McCall, 268 AD2d 654, 655 [2000]; Matter of Klein v Regan, 165 AD2d 944, 945 [1990]). The addendum was also properly precluded, as it referred to and relied on the original report.

Crew III, J.P., Carpinello, Mugglin and Lahtinen, 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

Kane, J. Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed March 22, 2005, which, inter alia, ruled that the medical reports of the independent medical examiner were properly precluded.

The self-insured employer arranged for an independent medical examiner to examine claimant. The employer’s counsel conceded at the hearing that this physician’s report was not in the Workers’ Compensation Board’s file, though an addendum to the report was filed. A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge precluded the report and addendum for noncompliance with the requirements of Workers’ Compensation Law § 137, and authorized treatment for claimant. The employer appealed to the Board, which upheld the decision, resulting in this appeal.

We affirm. Because the report was not filed with the Board within 10 business days after the examination, it was properly precluded (see Workers’ Compensation Law § 137; 12 NYCRR 300.2 [d] [3], [9], [11]; accord Matter of Jarek v McCall, 268 AD2d 654, 655 [2000]; Matter of Klein v Regan, 165 AD2d 944, 945 [1990]). The addendum was also properly precluded, as it referred to and relied on the original report.

Crew III, J.P., Carpinello, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 A.D.3d 1109, 822 N.Y.S.2d 338, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-olczyk-v-verizon-new-york-inc-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack