In re the Claim of Saintel v. St. Vincent's Hospital

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Saintel v. St. Vincent's Hospital

80 A.D.2d 686, 436 N.Y.S.2d 437, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10387

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

DecidedFebruary 12, 1981

StatusPublished

This text of 80 A.D.2d 686 (In re the Claim of Saintel v. St. Vincent's Hospital) 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

In re the Claim of Saintel v. St. Vincent's Hospital, 80 A.D.2d 686, 436 N.Y.S.2d 437, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10387 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed February 25, 1980. The issue in this case is whether substantial evidence supports the board’s finding that the change in condition of claimant’s back was not contemplated at the time of closing on a lump-sum nonschedule adjustment pursuant to subdivision 5-b of section 15 of the Workers’ Compensation Law. The claimant had suffered a back injury requiring disc removal surgery. A lump-sum settlement of $11,200 was made and his case was closed on June 4, 1973. A motion was made to reopen the case and reconsider whether there had been a change in claimant’s causally related condition not contemplated when the case was closed. The case was reopened on June 29, 1978. The board found: “based on Dr. Krause’s C-71 dated February 28, 1979 and testimony of Dr. Folk, that claimant has had a change in condition not contemplated at the time of closing on a lump sum non-schedule adjustment.” There is substantial evidence to support the board’s finding. Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workers’ Compensation Board. Mahoney, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Casey and Mikoll, 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 February 25, 1980. The issue in this case is whether substantial evidence supports the board’s finding that the change in condition of claimant’s back was not contemplated at the time of closing on a lump-sum nonschedule adjustment pursuant to subdivision 5-b of section 15 of the Workers’ Compensation Law. The claimant had suffered a back injury requiring disc removal surgery. A lump-sum settlement of $11,200 was made and his case was closed on June 4, 1973. A motion was made to reopen the case and reconsider whether there had been a change in claimant’s causally related condition not contemplated when the case was closed. The case was reopened on June 29, 1978. The board found: “based on Dr. Krause’s C-71 dated February 28, 1979 and testimony of Dr. Folk, that claimant has had a change in condition not contemplated at the time of closing on a lump sum non-schedule adjustment.” There is substantial evidence to support the board’s finding. Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workers’ Compensation Board. Mahoney, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Casey and Mikoll, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 A.D.2d 686, 436 N.Y.S.2d 437, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10387, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-saintel-v-st-vincents-hospital-nyappdiv-1981.