Claim of Murphy v. Crouse-Irving Memorial Hospital
Opinion of the Court
Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed December 22,1987.
Claimant, employed as an emergency room physician by the self-insured employer, sustained a series of transitory ischemic attacks on March 18, 1982. He was awarded benefits as a
Although the medical evidence on this issue is conflicting, the Board chose to accept the opinion of claimant’s expert on the issue of causal relationship, and, accordingly, we must accept the finding on this issue (see, Matter of Palermo v Gallucci & Sons, 5 NY2d 529; Matter of Rothstein v Fuller Brush Co., 30 AD2d 748). Other issues raised on this appeal are either not properly before this court, since they were not raised before the Board or passed upon by it except as to the question of reimbursement to the employer for the payment of disability benefits to claimant. The record demonstrates that a claim for reimbursement was properly filed (Workers’ Compensation Law § 206 [2]; 12 NYCRR 363.12), but not included in the award contained in the Board’s decision, thus resulting in a double recovery to claimant. Accordingly, this matter must be remitted to the Board for further proceedings to provide for the reimbursement of disability benefits (see, Workers’ Compensation Law § 224; Matter of State Mut. Life Assur. Co. v Walker, 24 AD2d 804).
Decision reversed, without costs, and matter remitted to the Workers’ Compensation Board for further proceedings not inconsistent with this court’s decision. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Weiss, Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.