Claim of Weygant v. Walter Kroll, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Weygant v. Walter Kroll, Inc.

286 A.D.2d 818, 730 N.Y.S.2d 262, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8635

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

DecidedSeptember 20, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 286 A.D.2d 818 (Claim of Weygant v. Walter Kroll, 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 Weygant v. Walter Kroll, Inc., 286 A.D.2d 818, 730 N.Y.S.2d 262, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8635 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Carpinello, J. Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed May 19, 2000, which ruled that the Workers’ Compensation Law Judge properly exercised his discretion in directing depositions of medical witnesses.

Here, as in Matter of Bathrick v New York State Dept. of Transp. (278 AD2d 704), the appeal has been rendered moot as a result of the rescission by the full Workers’ Compensation Board of the Board panel decision on appeal and we find no exception to the mootness doctrine (see, Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707).

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Spain and Rose, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

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

—Carpinello, J. Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed May 19, 2000, which ruled that the Workers’ Compensation Law Judge properly exercised his discretion in directing depositions of medical witnesses.

Here, as in Matter of Bathrick v New York State Dept. of Transp. (278 AD2d 704), the appeal has been rendered moot as a result of the rescission by the full Workers’ Compensation Board of the Board panel decision on appeal and we find no exception to the mootness doctrine (see, Matter of Hearst Corp. v Clyne, 50 NY2d 707).

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Spain and Rose, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

286 A.D.2d 818, 730 N.Y.S.2d 262, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8635, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-weygant-v-walter-kroll-inc-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack