From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Parrilla v. Leemar Knitting Mills

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 27, 1967
27 A.D.2d 965 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)

Opinion

April 27, 1967


Appeal by the employer and its carrier from a decision and award of the Workmen's Compensation Board. Based on reports of physicians and examinations conducted, various Referee's awards were made following claimant's injury, all of which were based on findings of partial or marked partial disability, determined as a 75% disability or a 25% earning capacity. The board's finding that claimant had sustained a "total loss of marketable earning capacity" is not sustained by the record. The medical evidence justified a finding that claimant was fit for some employment. Recommendations and findings that he should attempt to return to work were not followed. Claimant made a single attempt to regain his former job, and unless other employment is sought without success, the disability will, under these circumstances, be considered partial ( Bello v. General Elec. Co., 204 App. Div. 613). It is undisputed that he has some earning capacity. We can find no substantial evidence in the record that claimant sustained a total disability ( Matter of Mastropolo v. City of New York, 283 App. Div. 753), and no substantial evidence of the percentage of partial disability, if such there was. Decision reversed, with costs to appellants against the Workmen's Compensation Board, and case remitted to the Workmen's Compensation Board for further proceedings. Gibson, P.J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Aulisi and Gabrielli, JJ., concur in memorandum by Gabrielli, J.


Summaries of

Matter of Parrilla v. Leemar Knitting Mills

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 27, 1967
27 A.D.2d 965 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)
Case details for

Matter of Parrilla v. Leemar Knitting Mills

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of AGAPITO PARRILLA, Respondent, v. LEEMAR…

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

Date published: Apr 27, 1967

Citations

27 A.D.2d 965 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)

Citing Cases

Zamora v. N.Y. Neurologic Assocs.

The claimant's employer or the insurance carrier can rebut the inference by presenting “direct and positive…

Zamora v. New York Neurologic Assocs.

Although Burns referred to the inference discussed in Leeber and Tipping, contrary to the majority's…