You are here: / / LINK BETWEEN HEART ATTACK AND WORK NOT ESTABLISHED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVID...
,

LINK BETWEEN HEART ATTACK AND WORK NOT ESTABLISHED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

The Third Department, reversing the Workers' Compensation Board, found there was insufficient evidence linking claimant's heart attack (myocardial infarction) to his work:

While the Board is entitled to resolve conflicting medical opinions, there must be “medical opinion evidence regarding the probability of a causal relationship supported by a rational basis; a general expression of possibility will not suffice” … . Here, because the testimony of claimant's treating cardiologist expressed merely the possibility that the physical activities in which claimant engaged could have caused his myocardial infarction, such testimony falls short of the required degree of medical proof. As a result, the Board's determination based upon that testimony lacked a rational basis and was not supported by substantial evidence … . Matter of Hartigan v Albany County Sheriff's Dept., 2016 NY Slip Op 04280, 3rd Dept 6-2-16

WORKERS' COMPENSATION (LINK BETWEEN HEART ATTACK AND WORK NOT ESTABLISHED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE)/EVIDENCE (WORKERS' COMPENSATION, LINK BETWEEN HEART ATTACK AND WORK NOT ESTABLISHED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE)

You might also like
THE EVIDENCE DID NOT SUPPORT THE FINDING CLAIMANT’S INJURY WAS WORK-RELATED (THIRD DEPT).
Foreclosure On Both Junior and Senior Mortgages May Result in Unjust Enrichment If the Two Obligations Amount to More than the Fair Market Value
Garagekeeper’s Lien Ineffective Against Owner of Leased Vehicle/Lessee Did Not Have Apparent Authority to Consent to Vehicle Repair and Storage on Owner’s Behalf
DEFENDANTS NEVER INTERPOSED AN ANSWER SO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED, DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PERMISSION TO SERVE A LATE ANSWER PROPERLY DENIED, MATTER REMITTED SO PLAINTIFF CAN MOVE FOR A DEFAULT JUDGMENT (THIRD DEPT).
Plaintiff’s Proof Was Insufficient to Show an Interconnected Attorney-Client Relationship—Continuing Representation Doctrine Did Not Apply to Toll Statute of Limitations
HOMEOWNERS’ REBUTTED THE PRESUMPTION THAT THE TAX ASSESSMENT OF THEIR PROPERTY WAS VALID 3RD DEPT.
ALLEGATIONS FATHER DID NOT ABIDE BY THE VISITATION TERMS AND USED DRUGS DURING VISITATION SUPPORTED MOTHER’S PETITION FOR A MODIFICATION OF CUSTODY BASED UPON CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES (THIRD DEPT).
DEFENDANT’S WAIVER OF APPEAL WAS NOT VALID; THE COURT’S TERSE INQUIRY ABOUT THE APPEAL WAIVER WAS NOT CURED BY DEFENDANT’S EXECUTION OF A MORE DETAILED WRITTEN WAIVER AFTER SHE WAS SENTENCED AND MORE THAN A YEAR AFTER THE PLEA (THIRD DEPT).

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

LONG HAUL TRUCKERS NOT EMPLOYEES. FAILURE TO RESPOND TO JURY NOTES AFTER COUNSEL HAD BEEN MADE AWARE OF THE CONTENTS...