You are here: / / Disability Pre-dated Work at World Trade Center—Worker Entitled to...

Disability Pre-dated Work at World Trade Center—Worker Entitled to Workers’ Compensation

In reversing a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board which ruled the employer was not entitled to reimbursement from the Special Disability Fund on the ground that the employee’s lung disease was solely related to work at the World Trade Center, the Third Department wrote:

[The treating doctor] repeatedly expressed  his  opinion  that claimant’s interstitial lung disease was  related to both his exposure at the WTC site and certain exposures throughout his career with the employer, which included exposure to asbestos. …Thus, although reimbursement pursuant to Workers’ Compensation Law § 15 (8) (d) may be denied when a work-related injury is the sole  cause  of  a  permanent  disability…, there is no medical evidence present here to support the Board’s conclusion that claimant’s disability was solely caused by his WTC  site exposure and, therefore, the Fund was inappropriately discharged… . Matter of Surianello, 515055, 3rd Dept 7-3-13

 

You might also like
MOTHER PRESENTED SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF HER PRO SE PETITION FOR A MODIFICATION OF CUSTODY TO WARRANT A HEARING (THIRD DEPT).
DEFENDANT DEMONSTRATED WATER WAS NOT DIVERTED ONTO PLAINTIFF’S PROPERTY IN BAD FAITH.
Retroactive Application of New Regulations Affecting the Revocation of Driver’s Licenses for Alcohol- and Drug-Related Convictions or Incidents Okay—No Vested Right Re: License to Drive
Father’s Status as an Untreated Sex Offender, Together with Mother’s Willingness to Leave the Children with Father Unsupervised, Was Sufficient to Establish Neglect
THE RECORD WAS SILENT ON WHETHER DEFENDANT SIGNED THE WAIVER OF INDICTMENT IN OPEN COURT; DEFENDANT’S GUILTY PLEA WAS VACATED AND THE SUPERIOR COURT INFORMATION WAS DISMISSED (THIRD DEPT).
FAILURE TO INSTRUCT THE JURY THAT A WITNESS WAS AN ACCOMPLICE AS A MATTER OF LAW REQUIRED REVERSAL (THIRD DEPT).
COUNTY COURT SHOULD NOT HAVE DETERMINED THE INTEGRITY OF THE GRAND JURY WAS COMPROMISED BY THE PROSECUTOR’S FAILURE TO INQUIRE FURTHER INTO THE POTENTIAL BIAS OF A GRAND JUROR, A TEACHER, WHO HAD TAUGHT THE DEFENDANT TEN YEARS BEFORE, INDICTMENT REINSTATED (THIRD DEPT).
Question of Fact Whether Defendants Assumed a Duty of Reasonable Care When Escorting Elderly Plaintiff to His Car at Night

Categories

Sign Up for the Mailing List to Be Notified When the Site Is Updated.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Copyright © 2026 New York Appellate Digest, Inc.
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy

Employee’s Use of Personal Checking Account Did Not Amount to Misconduct Employer Policy Re: Firing of Employees Injured in Preventable Accidents Was...