From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Katsilogiannis v. Spiro's Service

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 12, 1988
140 A.D.2d 816 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Opinion

May 12, 1988

Appeal from the Workers' Compensation Board.


Claimant sustained head and back injuries when the taxicab in which she was a passenger was involved in an automobile accident. She filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits alleging that the accident occurred in the course of her employment as president and manager of Spiro's Service Station, Inc.

A hearing was held, and because claimant was a noncommunicative witness, apparently as a result of the injuries and trauma she suffered in the accident, her husband, Demitrios Katsilogiannis, provided all of the testimony pertaining to the accident. According to Katsilogiannis, claimant was on an errand to purchase machinery for the business at the time of the accident. When questioned about his relationship to the business, Katsilogiannis replied that he was not an officer of the corporation. However, the record contains an employer's report of injury which was signed by Katsilogiannis as corporate vice-president. Moreover, this document states that claimant's accident occurred while she was returning by taxicab to work from the New York City Department of Rent and Occupancy Tax. The Workers' Compensation Board found that the testimony of Katsilogiannis was not credible and that claimant's accident did not arise out of and in the course of her employment. This appeal ensued.

Claimant's only contention on appeal is that the Board's decision is not supported by substantial evidence in the record. Specifically, claimant contends that the Board erred in refusing to accept her husband's testimony that the accident occurred in the course of her employment. We disagree. It is within the Board's province to determine the credibility of witnesses (see, Matter of Lewis v Cambridge Filter Corp., 132 A.D.2d 802, 803, lv dismissed 70 N.Y.2d 871) and, in our view, the inconsistencies in the record provide a sufficient basis to support the Board's conclusion.

Decision affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P.J., Kane, Casey, Levine and Mercure, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Katsilogiannis v. Spiro's Service

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
May 12, 1988
140 A.D.2d 816 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
Case details for

Matter of Katsilogiannis v. Spiro's Service

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of ALEXANDRA KATSILOGIANNIS, Appellant, v…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: May 12, 1988

Citations

140 A.D.2d 816 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Citing Cases

Matter of Baumgarten v. State Banking Dept

As "the sole and final arbiter of whether the testimony of a particular witness is worthy of belief" (Matter…