Misita v. Williams Groceries & Meats Fair, Inc.
| Decision Date | 27 October 1977 |
| Citation | 399 N.Y.S.2d 71,59 A.D.2d 816 |
| Parties | Claim of Irma MISITA, Respondent, v. WILLIAMS GROCERIES AND MEATS FAIR, INC., et al., Appellants, Workmen's Compensation Board, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Mackenzie, Smith, Lewis, Michell & Hughes, Syracuse (George R. Wolff, Syracuse, of counsel), for appellants.
Oot & Fallon, Syracuse, for respondent.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Atty. Gen. , for respondent Workmen's Compensation Bd.
Before GREENBLOTT, J. P., and MAHONEY, MAIN, LARKIN and MIKOLL, JJ.
Appeal from a decision of the Workmen's Compensation Board, filed June 25, 1976, which reversed a Referee's disallowance of a claim for death benefits and directed that an award be made.
On February 29, 1968 the decedent, then 54 years old, five feet nine inches tall and weighing 265 pounds, collapsed and died in the course of his employment. Although no autopsy was performed, claimant's medical witness and appellants' doctor each gave his opinion that death was caused by ventricular arrhythmia and arteriosclerotic heart disease. Since proof was not taken until March, 1974, some six years after the death, no witness was able to recall the decedent's exact activities during the morning of the day he died. There was testimony, however, of the kind of work the decedent did at his place of employment which included unloading from trucks celery in 75-lb. wooden boxes, broccoli in boxes weighing 30 lbs cabbage in boxes weighing 50 lbs. and lettuce in bulk form weighing 45 to 50 lbs. At the conclusion of the hearings the Referee disallowed the claim on the ground that "there is no direct evidence as to the activities actually performed by the claimant on the morning of February 29, 1968", and that the work activities testified to "do not constitute activities more strenuous than the normal wear and tear of everyday living".
The board's rejection of the Referee's finding that direct evidence of work activity is essential to a conclusion that death was work-related, is supported by decisional law. The board could draw any reasonable inference from the facts (Matter of Stone v. N. Y. Artificial Breeder's Co-op, 33 A.D.2d 524, 303 N.Y.S.2d 537, mot. for lv. to app. den. 25 N.Y.2d 742, 305 N.Y.S.2d 1026, 252 N.E.2d 863) and findings supported by reasonable inferences from the facts are supported by substantial evidence (Matter of Ernest v. Boggs Lake...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kolodynski v. Aviv Knitwear Corp.
...evidence (Matter of Casucci v. Community Carting Co., App.Div., 427 N.Y.S.2d 81 (Apr. 24, 1980); Matter of Misita v. Williams Groceries & Meats Fair, 59 A.D.2d 816, 399 N.Y.S.2d 71, mot. for lv. to app. den. 43 N.Y.2d 648, 403 N.Y.S.2d 1026, 374 N.E.2d 399). Conflicting testimony was presen......
-
Casucci v. Community Carting Co.
... ... by substantial evidence (Matter of Misita v. Williams Groceries & Meats Fair, 59 A.D.2d ... ...
-
Bilow v. Town of Chateaugay
...activity and an injury(Matter of Mitchell v. Nason's Delivery, 75 A.D.2d 965, 428 N.Y.S.2d 345; see, Matter of Misita v. Williams Groceries & Meats Fair, 59 A.D.2d 816, 399 N.Y.S.2d 71, lv. denied 43 N.Y.2d 648, 403 N.Y.S.2d 1026, 374 N.E.2d 399). The Board may also "draw any reasonable inf......
-
Closson v. Dutchess County Sheriff's Dept.
...inferences from the facts; it is therefore supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (cf., Matter of Misita v. Williams Groceries & Meats Fair, 59 A.D.2d 816, 399 N.Y.S.2d 71, lv. denied43 N.Y.2d 648, 403 N.Y.S.2d 1026, 374 N.E.2d 399). Claimant's remaining contentions have been ......