Claim of Scollo v. Joseph J. Pietrafesa Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Scollo v. Joseph J. Pietrafesa Co.

105 A.D.2d 515, 481 N.Y.S.2d 464, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20548

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

DecidedOctober 18, 1984

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 105 A.D.2d 515 (Claim of Scollo v. Joseph J. Pietrafesa 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 Scollo v. Joseph J. Pietrafesa Co., 105 A.D.2d 515, 481 N.Y.S.2d 464, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20548 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed June 15, 1983, which ruled that claimant sustained an accidental injury in the course of his employment and awarded benefits.

Claimant was employed as a fabric cutter for a clothing manufacturer. He testified that, while lifting a heavy roll of fabric on March 14, 1980, he felt a snap in his back and a burning sensation in his legs. On March 25, 1980, a lumbar laminectomy was performed. The employer and carrier contested claimant’s application for workers’ compensation benefits. The Board held that claimant had suffered an accidental injury in the course of his employment. This appeal by the employer and carrier ensued.

[516]*516The Board’s decision must be affirmed. Questions of credibility of witnesses are solely within the province of the Board (Matter of Hopkins v Players’ Three, 99 AD2d 912; Matter of Hawthorne v Peartrees, Inc., 56 AD2d 961, affd 43 NY2d 683). Here, claimant’s testimony established that he injured his back while lifting material in the course of his employment. His physician testified that, assuming claimant’s testimony to be true, the events described by him could have caused the injury suffered. Thus, the Board’s decision was supported by substantial evidence. The fact that the employer introduced some contradictory evidence does not change this result.

Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workers’ Compensation Board. Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Levine and Harvey, 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 June 15, 1983, which ruled that claimant sustained an accidental injury in the course of his employment and awarded benefits.

Claimant was employed as a fabric cutter for a clothing manufacturer. He testified that, while lifting a heavy roll of fabric on March 14, 1980, he felt a snap in his back and a burning sensation in his legs. On March 25, 1980, a lumbar laminectomy was performed. The employer and carrier contested claimant’s application for workers’ compensation benefits. The Board held that claimant had suffered an accidental injury in the course of his employment. This appeal by the employer and carrier ensued.

[516]*516The Board’s decision must be affirmed. Questions of credibility of witnesses are solely within the province of the Board (Matter of Hopkins v Players’ Three, 99 AD2d 912; Matter of Hawthorne v Peartrees, Inc., 56 AD2d 961, affd 43 NY2d 683). Here, claimant’s testimony established that he injured his back while lifting material in the course of his employment. His physician testified that, assuming claimant’s testimony to be true, the events described by him could have caused the injury suffered. Thus, the Board’s decision was supported by substantial evidence. The fact that the employer introduced some contradictory evidence does not change this result.

Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workers’ Compensation Board. Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 A.D.2d 515, 481 N.Y.S.2d 464, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20548, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-scollo-v-joseph-j-pietrafesa-co-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack