Lebedeva v. Fojp Serv. Corp.

• Decision Date: 23 July 2020
• Docket Number: 529235
• Citation: 185 A.D.3d 1318,128 N.Y.S.3d 333
• Parties: In the Matter of the Claim of Anna LEBEDEVA, Appellant, v. FOJP SERVICE CORPORATION et al., Respondents. Workers' Compensation Board, Respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

185 A.D.3d 1318
128 N.Y.S.3d 333

In the Matter of the Claim of Anna LEBEDEVA, Appellant,
v.
FOJP SERVICE CORPORATION et al., Respondents.

Workers' Compensation Board, Respondent.

529235

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Calendar Date: June 9, 2020
Decided and Entered: July 23, 2020

128 N.Y.S.3d 334

John F. Clennan, Ronkonkoma, for appellant.

Letitia James, Attorney General, New York City (Steven Segall of counsel), for Workers' Compensation Board, respondent.

Before: Lynch, J.P., Devine, Aarons, Pritzker and Reynolds Fitzgerald, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Devine, J.

185 A.D.3d 1318

Appeals (1) from a decision of the Workers' Compensation Board, filed October 30, 2018, which ruled that claimant failed to comply with 12 NYCRR 300.13(b) and denied review of a decision by the Workers' Compensation Law Judge, and (2) from an amended decision of said Board, filed April 17, 2019, which clarified its prior decision and ruled that it would not exercise its discretion to consider claimant's application.

In June 2017, while working as a home attendant, claimant tripped, fell and was injured. She filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits that was established for various injuries. Following a July 2018 hearing before a Workers' Compensation Law Judge (hereinafter WCLJ), the WCLJ found that claimant had reached maximum medical improvement, directed the production of medical evidence on the issue of permanency and instructed claimant to produce documentation on labor market attachment. Following another hearing in August 2018, the WCLJ, among other things, again directed the production of medical evidence on the issue of permanency and noted that no further payments should be made to claimant as she had not produced documentation on labor market attachment as instructed.

Claimant, through counsel, filed a form RB–89 application with the Workers' Compensation Board seeking review of the WCLJ's August 2018 decision. The Board ruled that claimant's response...