Maring v. Town of Stockton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Maring v. Town of Stockton

59 A.D.2d 812, 399 N.Y.S.2d 78, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13892

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

DecidedOctober 27, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 59 A.D.2d 812 (Maring v. Town of Stockton) 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

Maring v. Town of Stockton, 59 A.D.2d 812, 399 N.Y.S.2d 78, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13892 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the employer from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, filed September 4, 1975, which discharged the Special Disability Fund from liability under the provisions of subdivision 8 of section 15 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. The board found that "the employer did not have knowledge of a preexisting permanent physical impairment and that the claimant’s diabetes condition was not a factor in any of the employer’s decisions with regard to the hiring or retaining of the claimant.” There is substantial evidence to sustain the determination of the board. Decision affirmed, with costs to the Special Disability Fund against the appellant. Greenblott, J. P., Kane, Main, Mikoll and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the employer from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, filed September 4, 1975, which discharged the Special Disability Fund from liability under the provisions of subdivision 8 of section 15 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. The board found that "the employer did not have knowledge of a preexisting permanent physical impairment and that the claimant’s diabetes condition was not a factor in any of the employer’s decisions with regard to the hiring or retaining of the claimant.” There is substantial evidence to sustain the determination of the board. Decision affirmed, with costs to the Special Disability Fund against the appellant. Greenblott, J. P., Kane, Main, Mikoll and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 A.D.2d 812, 399 N.Y.S.2d 78, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13892, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maring-v-town-of-stockton-nyappdiv-1977.