Costa v. New York State Workmen's Compensation Bd.
| Decision Date | 02 March 1970 |
| Parties | Claim of Anthony V. COSTA, Respondent, v. NEW YORK STATE WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION BOARD et al., Appellants, Workmen's Compensation Board, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Frank Bearup, Albany, for respondent.
Herbert Lasky, Hugh O'Boyle, New York City, for appellants.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen., Harry Rackow, New York City, for respondent Workmen's Compensation Board.
Before HERLIHY, P.J., and STALEY, GREENBLOTT, COOKE and SWEENEY, JJ.
Appeal by the employer and its carrier from a decision of the Workmen's Compensation Board, filed January 22, 1969.
Claimant, employed as a Principal Clerk by the Workmen's Compensation Board, was injured on Saturday morning, December 5, 1964 when he slipped and fell on a sidewalk adjacent to the school building while on his way to the school for the purpose of taking an interdepartmental promotional examination scheduled by the Department of Civil Service. The board determined that the accident arose out of and in the course of his employment finding that claimant had been urged by his superior to take the examination.
Appellant contends that claimant's injuries were incurred during a personal activity off the employer's premises outside of the employee's usual working hours without any degree of compulsion by the employer, and with no specific benefit available to the employer. Appellant further contends that claimant was under no compulsion to take the examination, and that the board's finding that claimant was 'urged' to take the examination was not warranted by the record.
The general rule is that risks of travel to and from work are not risks of employment. (Matter of DeVoe v. New York State Rys., 218 N.Y. 318, 113 N.E. 256, L.R.A.1917A, 250) There are certain exceptions as where the employee is an 'outside' employee, (Matter of Fonze v. Stuyvesant Oil Burner Corp., 10 A.D.2d 761, 197 N.Y.S.2d 496), where the employee is traveling or transportation is provided or paid in part by the employer, (Matter of Macaluso v. Alexander, Shumway & Utz Co., 11 A.D.2d 838, 203 N.Y.S.2d 106, mot. for lv. to app. den. 8 N.Y.2d 708, 206 N.Y.S.2d 1026, 169 N.E.2d 926), or where the employee has been directed to perform a 'special errand' for his employer on his way to work. (Matter of Respole v. Schorr, 25 A.D.2d 581, 266 N.Y.S.2d 863; Matter of Charak v. Leddy, 23 A.D.2d 437, 261 N.Y.S.2d 486; Matter of Mason v. New York Abstract Co., 11 A.D.2d 569, 200 N.Y.S.2d 677.)
Respondents contend that claimant's trip to take the examination, although outside his regular duties, was made at the express direction of the employer, and was thus in the nature of a ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ricciardi v. Aniero Concrete Co., Inc.
...Matter of Charak v. Leddy, 23 A.D.2d 437, 261 N.Y.S.2d 486; Matter of Mason v. New York Abstract Co., 11 A.D.2d 569, 200 N.Y.S.2d 677.) 308 N.Y.S.2d at 94. There is no New Jersey precedent which either expressly or impliedly supports the suggestion that a partial though deliberate and subst......
-
Neacosia v. New York Power Authority
...drycleaning option, there is nothing in the record to suggest that he was required to do so (cf., Matter of Costa v. New York State Workmen's Compensation Bd., 34 A.D.2d 585, 308 N.Y.S.2d 93). Accordingly, the Board's decision must be ORDERED that the decision is reversed, without costs, an......
-
Willis v. Young Men's Christian Ass'n of Amsterdam
... ... State of New York, 29 A.D.2d 64, 65, 285 N.Y.S.2d 758, 760, affd ... ...
-
Harrison v. N. Y. C. Housing Authority
...appeared to be mentally unbalanced and who had previously manifested hostility toward claimant'. Matter of Costa v. New York State Workmen's Compensation Board (34 A.D.2d 585, 308 N.Y.S.2d 93) is not controlling here. More closely aligned to the present facts is Matter of Notowitz v. Rose T......