From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jarovic v. Icon Restoration & Contracting

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Feb 14, 2013
103 A.D.3d 935 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-02-14

In the Matter of the Claim of Albert JAROVIC, Appellant, v. ICON RESTORATION & CONTRACTING et al., Respondents. Workers' Compensation Board, Respondent.

Parker Waichman, LLP, Port Washington (Jay L.T. Breakstone of counsel), for appellant. Weiss, Wexler & Wornow, PC, New York City (Michael J. Reynolds of counsel), for Icon Restoration & Contracting and another, respondents.



Parker Waichman, LLP, Port Washington (Jay L.T. Breakstone of counsel), for appellant. Weiss, Wexler & Wornow, PC, New York City (Michael J. Reynolds of counsel), for Icon Restoration & Contracting and another, respondents.
Before: MERCURE, J.P., ROSE, LAHTINEN and GARRY, JJ.

LAHTINEN, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Workers' Compensation Board, filed February 1, 2011, which ruled that the employer's workers' compensation carrier was entitled to a full credit against claimant's third-party settlement recovery.

The Workers' Compensation Board's decision in this claim, in which there was a significant third-party settlement, was rendered before our decision inMatter of Stenson v. New York State Dept. of Transp., 84 A.D.3d 22, 919 N.Y.S.2d 584 [2011] . Aspects of the Board's decision are inconsistent withStenson. The Board incorrectly indicated that it lacked authority to address the manner in which the workers' compensation carrier took credit for the third-party recovery and it failed to specifically address whether the carrier had released itself from its obligation to contribute its proportional share of litigation costs. The Board has since changed its approach to such issues to conform to the holding in Stenson ( see Employer: Alpha Masonary, 2011 WL 4847393, *4–6, 2011 N.Y. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 5151, *9–15 [WCB 8061 3130, Sept. 14, 2011]; see also Employer: Marcon Dev. Corp., 2012 WL 6762129, *1–2, 2012 N.Y. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 10475, *3–7 [WCB 0041 6637, Dec. 31, 2012]; Employer: Prudent Engineering LLP, 2012 WL 1893311, *2, 2012 N.Y. Wrk. Comp. LEXIS 6031, *3–5 [WCB 6070 4660, May 16, 2012] ). The matter must thus be reversed and remitted to the Board ( see Matter of Stenson v. New York State Dept. of Transp., 84 A.D.3d at 27, 919 N.Y.S.2d 584;see also Matter of Morphew v. Aero Transporters, Inc., 90 A.D.3d 1459, 1460–1461, 936 N.Y.S.2d 354 [2011] ).

ORDERED that the decision is reversed, without costs, and matter remitted to the Workers' Compensation Board for further proceedings not inconsistent with this Court's decision.

MERCURE, J.P., ROSE and GARRY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Jarovic v. Icon Restoration & Contracting

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Feb 14, 2013
103 A.D.3d 935 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

Jarovic v. Icon Restoration & Contracting

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of Albert JAROVIC, Appellant, v. ICON…

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

Date published: Feb 14, 2013

Citations

103 A.D.3d 935 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
103 A.D.3d 935
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 960