You are here: / / BACK AND NECK INJURIES PROPERLY RULED AN OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE RESULTING...

BACK AND NECK INJURIES PROPERLY RULED AN OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE RESULTING FROM REPETITIVE LIFTING AND CARRYING (THIRD DEPT).

The Third Department determined claimant demonstrated his back and neck injuries constituted an occupational disease related to his lifting and mix heavy containers of compound and applying the compound to walls and ceilings:

​

“In order for an occupational disease to be established, the claimant must establish a recognizable link between his or her condition and a distinctive feature of his or her employment”… . Claimant testified that his job required lifting and carrying containers of plastering compound weighing roughly 50 pounds and using the compound to hang sheetrock for eight hours a day, five or six days a week, for over 30 years. Samuel Kim, a neurosurgeon, opined that claimant suffered from chronic neck and back pain and degenerative disc disease in his cervical and lumbar spine and that the condition was consistent with a history of repetitive movement, and Yong Kim, claimant’s treating physician, attributed claimant’s back pain to “repetitive use at work.” In light of the foregoing, and given that no contrary medical opinions were presented, the Board’s determination that claimant suffered from an occupational disease resulting from repetitive stress is supported by substantial evidence and will not be disturbed … . Matter of Garcia v MCI Interiors, Inc., 2018 NY Slip Op 00873, Third Dept 2-8-18

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION LAW (OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE, BACK AND NECK INJURIES PROPERLY RULED AN OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE RESULTING FROM REPETITIVE LIFTING AND CARRYING (THIRD DEPT))/OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE (WORKERS’ COMPENSATION LAW, BACK AND NECK INJURIES PROPERLY RULED AN OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE RESULTING FROM REPETITIVE LIFTING AND CARRYING (THIRD DEPT))

You might also like
BECAUSE THE CRIMES INVOLVED ARE NOT “REGISTRABLE OFFENSES” AND NOTHING IN DEFENDANT’S CRIMINAL HISTORY WERE SEX OFFENSES, THE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE IMPOSED SPECIALIZED SEXUAL OFFENDER CONDITIONS UPON DEFENDANT’S PROBATION (THIRD DEPT).
COMMISSIONER OF LABOR PROPERLY ISSUED A WAGE ORDER INCREASING THE MINIMUM WAGE FOR CERTAIN FAST FOOD WORKERS TO $15 AN HOUR.
AMOUNT OF HEROIN ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN SOLD NOT PROVEN, STATUTORY SALE AND RELATED CONSPIRACY COUNTS DISMISSED.
Questioning by Police and Caseworker Violated Defendant’s Right to Counsel, Failure to Suppress Statements Was Not Harmless Error
POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA CONSTITUTED DISQUALIFYING MISCONDUCT.
Courts Should Not Defer to Zoning Board of Appeals’ Determination of a Purely Legal Question (the Meaning of a Town Code Provision)
SMALL INFORMAL LAW FIRM PROPERLY DISQUALIFIED BECAUSE AN ASSOCIATE PREVIOUSLY REPRESENTED THE OPPOSING PARTY 3RD DEPT.
CLAIMANT, WHO DISTRIBUTED BAKED GOODS UNDER A DISTRIBUTION CONTRACT, WAS AN EMPLOYEE ENTITLED TO UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BENEFITS (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 © 2025 New York Appellate Digest, Inc.
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy

INSUFFICIENT SHOWING THAT SEX OFFENDER’S VIOLATION OF NON-SEXUAL TERMS... OHIO GUN DEALER WHO SOLD GUN USED TO SHOOT PLAINTIFF IN NEW YORK DID NOT HAVE...