Claim of Robinson v. New York Telephone Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Robinson v. New York Telephone Co.

60 A.D.2d 709, 400 N.Y.S.2d 592, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14734

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

DecidedDecember 22, 1977

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 60 A.D.2d 709 (Claim of Robinson v. New York Telephone 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 Robinson v. New York Telephone Co., 60 A.D.2d 709, 400 N.Y.S.2d 592, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14734 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, filed May 7, 1976, which awarded benefits for a continuing disability during a period when the claimant also received vacation pay and, in fact, worked for three days. The board found that the claimant was disabled throughout the period in question and that finding was neither disputed in the appeal to the board not on this appeal. There is nothing in the record to indicate that the vacation pay was intended to be in lieu of compensation payments either factually or legally. It is well established that a claimant may receive both vacation pay and compensation benefits under such circumstances (Matter of Knaszak v Buffalo Forge Co., 15 AD2d 971; cf. Matter of Cleveland v American Mgt. Assn., 45 AD2d 506). The record does not establish that any claim for reimbursement was made by the appellant and the wages earned were likewise not in lieu of compensation. Since no [710]*710claim for reimbursement was made, and the appellant has failed to establish that no disability existed, this appeal as to an award for reduced earnings has no substantial merit. Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board against the employer. Koreman, P. J., Greenblott, Sweeney, 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 Workmen’s Compensation Board, filed May 7, 1976, which awarded benefits for a continuing disability during a period when the claimant also received vacation pay and, in fact, worked for three days. The board found that the claimant was disabled throughout the period in question and that finding was neither disputed in the appeal to the board not on this appeal. There is nothing in the record to indicate that the vacation pay was intended to be in lieu of compensation payments either factually or legally. It is well established that a claimant may receive both vacation pay and compensation benefits under such circumstances (Matter of Knaszak v Buffalo Forge Co., 15 AD2d 971; cf. Matter of Cleveland v American Mgt. Assn., 45 AD2d 506). The record does not establish that any claim for reimbursement was made by the appellant and the wages earned were likewise not in lieu of compensation. Since no [710]*710claim for reimbursement was made, and the appellant has failed to establish that no disability existed, this appeal as to an award for reduced earnings has no substantial merit. Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board against the employer. Koreman, P. J., Greenblott, Sweeney, Mikoll and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 A.D.2d 709, 400 N.Y.S.2d 592, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14734, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-robinson-v-new-york-telephone-co-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack