January 2020 New York Workers’ Compensation Law Reporter Highlights
Lack of PPD finding renders directive for labor market attachment as premature
Case name: Poulard v. Southside Hospital, 119 NYWCLR 207 (N.Y. App. Div., 2019)
Summary: The Appellate Division reversed the Full Board’s order for the claimant to provide evidence of labor market attachment as the claimant had not been classified as permanently partially disabled.
Absence of PPD determination nixes requirement that claimant search for work
Case name: Bowers v. New York City Transit Authority, 119 NYWCLR 208 (N.Y. App. Div., 2019)
Summary: The Appellate Division held that the Full Board’s order for the claimant to demonstrate attachment to the labor market was incorrect. The WCLJ’s decision was not based on the determination of the claimant’s nature and degree of disability. The claimant will continue to receive awards at a tentative rate and rely on her doctor’s expertise on the disability rate.
Repeated omissions regarding work status support permanent disqualification
Case name: Shiseido Americas Corp., 119 NYWCLR 215 (N.Y. W.C.B. Full Board, 2019)
Summary: Claimant made multiple omissions regarding her return to work and therefore was in violation of WCL Section 114-a. The claimant received permanent disqualification of benefits.
Delay in treatment helps nix check condition from accident claim
Case name: Community Services for Dev. Disabled, 119 NYWCLR 216 (N.Y. W.C.B., Full Board 2019)
Summary: In a matter where the claimant did not mention a neck injury in her EC-3 form two weeks after her accident and symptoms were not noted or treated until 7 weeks after, the Full Board found that the neck injury was not related to the work accident.
Claimant’s misrepresentations warrant discretionary penalty under WCL Section 114-a
Case name: Felicello v. Malboro Central School, 119 NYWCLR 223 (N.Y. App. Div., 2019)
Summary: The Appellate Division affirmed the Board’s ruling that the claimant was in violation of WCL Section 114-a due to repeated false certifications that his doctors advised him that he could not return to his pre-injury position and should retire. The claimant was disqualified from future indemnity benefits.
Claimant proves accident occurred while performing assignment for employer
Case name: Sheehan v. Nationwide Court Services Inc., 119 NYWCLR 228 (N.Y. App. Div., 2019)
Summary: The Appellate Division affirmed the Board’s ruling that the claimant, a process servier, who was involved in a motor vehicle accident after servicing process before the start of her workday was in the course of her employment.
New York Workers’ Compensation Law Reporter, January 16, 2020