Claim of Roller v. Lehigh Portland Cement Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Roller v. Lehigh Portland Cement Co.

89 A.D.2d 1040, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18310

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

DecidedSeptember 22, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 89 A.D.2d 1040 (Claim of Roller v. Lehigh Portland Cement 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 Roller v. Lehigh Portland Cement Co., 89 A.D.2d 1040, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18310 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion to dismiss appeal granted, without costs. The decision of the board which denied applications to reopen three cases and restored two active cases to the referee calendar is interlocutory in nature and is, therefore, not appealable (Workers’ Compensation Law, § 23). Moreover, it is not clear from the board’s decision that the parties have been precluded from litigating the issue of the effect of the previous injuries on claimant’s over-all disability in the two active cases and, in any event, the decision appealed from may be reviewed on an appeal from a final decision of the board. Kane, J. P., Main, Casey, Mikoll and Yesawich, Jr., JJ., concur.

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

Motion to dismiss appeal granted, without costs. The decision of the board which denied applications to reopen three cases and restored two active cases to the referee calendar is interlocutory in nature and is, therefore, not appealable (Workers’ Compensation Law, § 23). Moreover, it is not clear from the board’s decision that the parties have been precluded from litigating the issue of the effect of the previous injuries on claimant’s over-all disability in the two active cases and, in any event, the decision appealed from may be reviewed on an appeal from a final decision of the board. Kane, J. P., Main, Casey, Mikoll and Yesawich, Jr., JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

89 A.D.2d 1040, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18310, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-roller-v-lehigh-portland-cement-co-nyappdiv-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack