Claim of Pistor v. Pan American Airways

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Pistor v. Pan American Airways

165 A.D.2d 917, 560 N.Y.S.2d 527, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11055

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

DecidedSeptember 13, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 165 A.D.2d 917 (Claim of Pistor v. Pan American Airways) 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 Pistor v. Pan American Airways, 165 A.D.2d 917, 560 N.Y.S.2d 527, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11055 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed September 27, 1988, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant sustained an accidental injury in the course of her employment.

The decision awarding claimant workers’ compensation benefits is supported by substantial evidence and must be affirmed. The injury to her back occurred while claimant was transporting certain work materials to her place of employment. Although she was not yet at work when the injury occurred, the transporting of the materials was not done as a matter of personal choice (cf., Matter of Broich v New York State Union Coll. of Optometry, 117 AD2d 868). Claimant was required to have these materials with her while performing her job and there were no facilities at her place of employment to store the materials (see, Matter of Hoch v Hansen, 111 AD2d 1066; Matter of Shafran v Board of Educ., 25 AD2d 336, lv denied 18 NY2d 579).

Decision affirmed, without costs.

Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Yesawich,. Jr., and Mercure, 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 September 27, 1988, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant sustained an accidental injury in the course of her employment.

The decision awarding claimant workers’ compensation benefits is supported by substantial evidence and must be affirmed. The injury to her back occurred while claimant was transporting certain work materials to her place of employment. Although she was not yet at work when the injury occurred, the transporting of the materials was not done as a matter of personal choice (cf., Matter of Broich v New York State Union Coll. of Optometry, 117 AD2d 868). Claimant was required to have these materials with her while performing her job and there were no facilities at her place of employment to store the materials (see, Matter of Hoch v Hansen, 111 AD2d 1066; Matter of Shafran v Board of Educ., 25 AD2d 336, lv denied 18 NY2d 579).

Decision affirmed, without costs.

Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Yesawich,. Jr., and Mercure, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

165 A.D.2d 917, 560 N.Y.S.2d 527, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11055, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-pistor-v-pan-american-airways-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack