Wen Liu v. Div. of Gen. Internal Med.

• Decision Date: 03 September 2020
• Docket Number: 530215
• Citation: 129 N.Y.S.3d 208,186 A.D.3d 1770
• Parties: In the Matter of the Claim of WEN LIU, Appellant, v. DIVISION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, MOUNT SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, et al., Respondents. Workers' Compensation Board, Respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

186 A.D.3d 1770

129 N.Y.S.3d 208

In the Matter of the Claim of WEN LIU, Appellant,

v. DIVISION OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, MOUNT SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, et al., Respondents.Workers' Compensation Board, Respondent.

530215

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

Calendar Date: August 20, 2020

Decided and Entered: September 3, 2020

Law Office Anthony Ranieri, Ozone Park (Anthony Ranieri of counsel), for appellant.

Vecchione, Vecchione, Connors & Cano, LLP, Garden City Park (Brian M. Anson of counsel), for Division of General Internal Medicine, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, and others, respondents.

Before: Garry, P.J., Lynch, Aarons, Reynolds Fitzgerald and Colangelo, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Garry, P.J.

Appeal from a decision of the Workers' Compensation Board, filed April 1, 2019, which ruled that claimant did not sustain a causally-related injury and denied her claim for workers' compensation benefits.

In May 2010, claimant, a data programming analyst, filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits claiming that she had sustained an injury to her neck on June 5, 2008, when she fell at work after becoming dizzy. Claimant was later found to have provided prima facie evidence of injuries to her head and neck, and carpal tunnel syndrome in the left wrist. The employer failed to file a timely notice of controversy and, therefore, was precluded from submitting evidence that claimant did not sustain accidental injuries or that the alleged injuries did not arise out of and in the course of her employment (see Workers' Compensation Law § 25[2][b] ). A Workers' Compensation Law Judge nevertheless found that claimant had not demonstrated a causal connection between her injuries and her employment and disallowed the claim. The Workers' Compensation Board upheld the determination, and claimant appeals.

We affirm. "The employer's failure to timely file a notice of controversy did not relieve claimant from [her] burden to demonstrate a causal relationship between [her] employment and medical condition" ( Matter of Cunningham v. New York City Tr. Auth., 122 A.D.3d 1042, 1042, 996 N.Y.S.2d 394 [2014] [internal quotation marks, brackets and citations omitted]; see Matter of Scott v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Tr. Operating Auth., 132 A.D.3d 1048, 1049, 17 N.Y.S.3d 332 [2015] ). "[I]n order to establish her claim for benefits, claimant bore the burden of demonstrating, by competent medical evidence, that a causal connection existed between her injuries and her employment" ( Matter of Nock v. New York City Dept. of Educ., 160 A.D.3d 1238, 1239, 75 N.Y.S.3d 330 [2018] [internal quotation marks, brackets and citations omitted]; see Matter of Hansen v. Saks Fifth Ave., 145 A.D.3d 1257, 1257, 42 N.Y.S.3d 678 [2016] ). "Where ... medical proof is offered to demonstrate that causal relationship, such proof must signify a probability as to the underlying cause of the claimant's injury which is supported by a rational basis" ( Matter of Hansen v. Saks Fifth Ave., 145 A.D.3d at 1257, 42 N.Y.S.3d 678 [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see Matter of Fox v. Altmar–Parish–Williamstown Cent. Sch. Dist., 175 A.D.3d 1728, 1729, 109 N.Y.S.3d 761 [2019] ).

Claimant's medical experts concluded that she suffers from neck, head and...