Manning v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.
| Decision Date | 24 April 1986 |
| Parties | In the Matter of the Claim of Robert T. MANNING, Jr., Respondent, v. NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION et al., Appellants, and Special Fund For Reopened Cases, Respondent, Workers' Compensation Board, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Jones, Presti & Rooney (Joel M. Gluck, of counsel), New York City, for appellants.
Patrick E. Harnedy (Morris N. Lissauer, of counsel), New York City, for Special Fund For Reopened Cases, respondent.
Before KANE, J.P., and MAIN, YESAWICH, LEVINE and HARVEY, JJ.
KANE, Justice Presiding.
Appeal from a decision of the Workers' Compensation Board, filed April 11, 1985.
At issue on this appeal is whether it is the responsibility of the insurance carrier or the Special Fund for Reopened Cases to reimburse claimant for medical expenses incurred in excess of his net recovery in a third-party action following a compensable injury. The amounts are substantial as a result of claimant's continuing total disability since his injury in 1962.
The record demonstrates that subsequent to the closing of this case on April 24, 1968 and after disposition of the recovery in the third-party action, the case was reopened upon claimant's application on May 1, 1979 to consider questions concerning claimant's entitlement to deficiency compensation. Such compensation includes medical expenses as well as weekly benefits (see, Matter of Dimaggio v. International Chimney Corp., 285 App.Div. 226, 136 N.Y.S.2d 311). In view of the specific statutory proscription of awards of deficiency compensation against the Special Fund (Workers' Compensation Law § 25-a[8] ), the difference between the amount actually received by claimant in the third-party action and the benefits he is entitled to under the Workers' Compensation Law continue to remain the responsibility of the carrier (see, Matter of Schreckinger v. York Distrs., 9 A.D.2d 333, 194 N.Y.S.2d 67).
Decision affirmed, with costs to the Special Fund for Reopened Cases.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Manning v. Utilities Mutual Ins. Co.
... ... UTILITIES MUTUAL INSURANCE CO., INC.; NIAGARA MOHWAK POWER CO.; JOHN DOE, name is fictitious; RICHARD ROE, ... LLP, New York, NY (Heidi Balk, on the brief), for Appellee Niagara Mohawk Power Co ... STUART C. LEVENE, Ford, Marrin, Esposito, ... See Manning v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., 501 N.Y.S.2d 218 (3d Dep't 1986); Manning v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., ... ...
-
Manning v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.
...501 N.E.2d 36 In Matter of Manning (Robert, Jr.) v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. NO. 815 COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK Oct 09, 1986 119 A.D.2d 947, 501 N.Y.S.2d 218 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL GRANTED OR Denied. ...