Claim of Constant v. Constant Spray Painting Co.
Opinion of the Court
Appeal by an employer and its insurance carrier from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board in a second injury case. Claimant’s accident and injury gave rise to a third-party action which was' settled, without the consent of the carrier. Pursuant to agreement made prior thereto, the carrier reduced its lien of $4,847.78 (covering medical expenses of $1,279.68 and 184% weeks compensation payments of $3,568.10) to $1,500. Substantially all of the medical payments and some $2,293 of the compensation payments were for the first 104 weeks. The carrier’s application for reimbursement from respondent Special Disability Fund of the amounts paid by it in excess of the compensation and medical benefits paid by it for the first 104 weeks was denied. The board recognized that under the statute the Special Fund had no rights with respect to the settlement. (Workmen’s Compensation Law, § 29, subd. 5.) The board held, however, that the carrier must be “ actually out of pocket ” for 104 weeks of compensation and medical payments made by it, before requesting reimbursement for payments beyond that period; that the carrier’s waiver of any portion of its lien “is on its own behalf and is in no way binding on” the Special Fund; and that carrier is not out of pocket for more than 104 weeks “ when the amount of the waiver of its third-party lien is excluded and is therefore not entitled to any reimbursement from the Special Disability Fund ”. The settlement having been made without the consent of the carrier, this ease does not involve the factor of deficiency compensation as do Matter of Dougherty v. Quakenbush Waverly Stage Go. (10 A D 2d 125) and Matter of Bowdring v. Superior Souse é Window Gleaning (10 A D 2d 751). Our holding in those cases is nevertheless decisive here. As between the carrier and the Special Fund, the latter has no concern with
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.