Opinion
December 20, 1961
Present — Bergan, P.J., Coon, Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ.
Appeal by a self-insured employer from a decision and award of the Workmen's Compensation Board, one member dissenting, which affirmed the decision of the Referee that claimant had sustained a compensable injury. Claimant, a teacher for 34 years in the school system of the City of Buffalo, was injured as she was alighting from a motor vehicle in which she had been driven by a coteacher to the church where the funeral services of a retired Superintendent of Schools of that city, under whose High School principalship she had served for 15 years, were about to be conducted. The finding of a majority of the board that the accident arose out of and in the course of her employment is challenged by appellant. At the regular monthly meeting with the principals of the city schools held on the day following the death, the Superintendent of Schools discussed the subject of attendance of the funeral of Doctor Bapst by members of the teaching staff. He indicated that the schools of the city would not be closed on its date and it was understood that each principal would be permitted to exercise his independent judgment as to the number and identity of those to be excused from their teaching assignments to attend the funeral services and the means of "covering their classes" during their absence since no substitute teachers were to be hired. The principal of the school in which claimant was employed determined that 8 of the 82-member faculty would be permitted to attend the funeral rites. In compliance with a directive to his administrative assistant, she, according preferment to those teachers "who had taught under Dr. Bapst", selected the personnel of the group which included claimant who, during a long professional tenure, had not previously attended a like event. While on her way from the school to the church with three similarly chosen fellow teachers, all of whom intended to return to their employment when the funeral services had been concluded, she sustained the injuries for which compensation has been awarded. Appellant argues that claimant was not compelled to go to the funeral and that when injured she was fulfilling a purely personal desire to express her respect for an old and admired friend. There was evidence by the administrative assistant that "it has always been a policy to send a small delegation when anyone close to the school dies" and that since "Dr. Bapst was a prominent figure we sent a larger delegation than usual." Doctor Hayes, the principal of the school, stated that claimant "attended the funeral of Reverend Doctor Robert T. Bapst as an official representative of South Park High School", expressed the view "that her participation during school hours at a uniquely school-connected function, and as a representative of a faculty of eighty-two teachers, clearly indicate[d] that her injury was in line of duty" and explained that she could not refuse in good conscience to accept the representative responsibility. Doctor Manch, the Superintendent of Schools, testified that he would "assume a principal could consider an individual or group as representing the school" and that if he did, "his authority to handle it in that way in his school" would be sanctioned. He considered attendance at the funeral by members of the faculty "a furtherance of school activities" since it concerned "a matter of teaching children respect for persons who occupy a position of leadership in our community". Thus the board could find that claimant's activity conformed to a custom established by her employer, involved some element of ethical compulsion and was of concurrent benefit to the educational process. Its determination that claimant's participation in the group mission was within the spatial limits of her employment and not personal is supported by substantial evidence. ( Matter of Waters v. Taylor Co., 218 N.Y. 248; Matter of Tedesco v. General Elec. Co., 305 N.Y. 544, 550; Matter of Piusinski v. Transit Val. Country Club, 259 App. Div. 765, affd. 283 N.Y. 674; Matter of Gross v. Davey Tree Expert Co., 248 App. Div. 838, affd. 272 N.Y. 657; Matter of Nesofsky v. Ragorotsky, 250 App. Div. 792, affd. 274 N.Y. 596; Matter of Redfield v. Boulevard Gardens Housing Corp., 4 A.D.2d 906; Matter of Murphy v. New York Butchers Dressed Meat Co., 249 App. Div. 888.) We find no merit in appellant's further contention that subdivision 16 of section 2554 Educ. of the Education Law was intended to provide a criterion for accidental injuries different from that specified in subdivision 7 of section 2 Work. Comp. of the Workmen's Compensation Law. Decision and award of the Workmen's Compensation Board unanimously affirmed, with costs.