Opinion
September 13, 1990
Appeal from the Workers' Compensation Board.
The issues raised herein involve questions of fact relating to credibility and medical causation and were properly determined in claimant's favor (see, Matter of Film v. Holmes Transp., 147 A.D.2d 831). Any conflicting inferences presented by the evidence or the testimony were for the Workers' Compensation Board to resolve (see, Matter of Boscaino v. Montefiore Med. Center, 90 A.D.2d 611). Here, claimant's detailed and coherent account of the events surrounding the sudden paralysis on his left side, Dr. Paul Clark's testimony that the disability was causally related to claimant's employment, and the acknowledgement by the employer and carrier's expert that physical exertion by an individual with arteriosclerotic heart disease might precipitate a stroke, provide substantial evidence to support the Board's determination (see, Matter of Gaylord v. Ronald Gaylord, Inc., 90 A.D.2d 609).
Decision affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P.J., Casey, Weiss, Yesawich, Jr., and Mercure, JJ., concur.