Greene v. Charles Freihofer Baking Co.

180 A.D.2d 980, 580 N.Y.S.2d 808, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2890
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 27, 1992
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 180 A.D.2d 980 (Greene v. Charles Freihofer Baking 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
Greene v. Charles Freihofer Baking Co., 180 A.D.2d 980, 580 N.Y.S.2d 808, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2890 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed September 20, 1990, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant sustained an accidental injury in the course of his employment.

We reject the employer’s contention that the record fails to support the finding by the Workers’ Compensation Board of accident arising out of and in the course of employment. Psychological or nervous injury precipitated by psychic trauma is compensable to the same extent as physical injury (Matter of Rackley v County of Rensselaer, 141 AD2d 232, lv dismissed 74 NY2d 791) and a determination of emotional injury may be made even if the cause adversely affects a claimant due only to his or her particular sensitivity (see, Matter of Kaliski v Fairchild Republic Co., 151 AD2d 867, affd on mem below 76 NY2d 1002). Here, claimant testified that, among other things, he was "totally devastated” by the memorandum that had been distributed which was critical of his job performance, that he felt that he was subjected to public ridicule, that he had lost his credibility as a supervisor and that he underwent and continued to receive psychiatr ic treat[981]*981ment. This, combined with the medical testimony of claimant’s psychiatrist that claimant was suffering from an adjustment disorder in reaction to the memorandum, provides substantial evidence to support the Board’s conclusion, notwithstanding the conflicting medical opinion of the employer’s expert (see, Matter of Rackley v County of Rensselaer, supra). The employer’s remaining contentions have been considered and found to be either unpreserved for our review or lacking in merit.

Weiss, P. J., Levine, Mercure, Mahoney and Casey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

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

Related

Maas v. Cornell University
253 A.D.2d 1 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Claim of Leggio v. Suffolk County Police Department
245 A.D.2d 897 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Claim of Smith v. Steuben County Highway Department
199 A.D.2d 590 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
Claim of Incorvia v. Carborundum Insulation Co.
196 A.D.2d 915 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
Claim of Perry v. Georgia Pacific Corp.
195 A.D.2d 658 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
180 A.D.2d 980, 580 N.Y.S.2d 808, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2890, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/greene-v-charles-freihofer-baking-co-nyappdiv-1992.