From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Ribar v. County of Suffolk

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 18, 1986
125 A.D.2d 801 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

December 18, 1986

Appeal from the Workers' Compensation Board.


The employer objects to the finding of dual and similar employment made by the Workers' Compensation Board. Claimant sustained neck and back injuries when she fell while working as chairperson of election inspectors at a polling place in Suffolk County on primary day in 1983. In her regular, full-time employment, claimant worked for a lawyer as his legal secretary/office manager. The Board's finding of dual and similar employment is based upon its conclusion that her duties as an election inspector and as a legal secretary/office manager were clerical in nature, involving tallying, filing and record keeping.

The employer points to certain evidence in the record to support its contention that claimant's duties in her employment with the lawyer involved a great deal more skill and responsibility than her purely clerical duties as an election inspector. In view of the Board's broad power to determine factual issues and draw inferences from the evidence (see, e.g., Matter of Hill v. Thompson, 61 N.Y.2d 1018; Matter of Schwartz v Howard, Needles, Tannen Bergendorf, 93 A.D.2d 930), we conclude that the Board's decision finding the duties of both jobs to be essentially clerical in nature cannot be disturbed. On appeal from a decision of the Board, the question is not whether the evidence supports a finding other than that made by the Board. Nor is it relevant whether this court agrees with the Board's findings. Rather, the sole issue is whether there is substantial evidence in the record to support the Board's decision (see, Matter of Johnson v. Moog, Inc., 114 A.D.2d 538; Matter of Haydel v. Sears, Roebuck Co., 106 A.D.2d 759). Since there is such support for the Board's decision herein, it must be affirmed.

Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workers' Compensation Board. Mahoney, P.J., Kane, Casey, Weiss and Levine, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Ribar v. County of Suffolk

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 18, 1986
125 A.D.2d 801 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

Matter of Ribar v. County of Suffolk

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of CLAUDIA RIBAR, Respondent, v. COUNTY OF…

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

Date published: Dec 18, 1986

Citations

125 A.D.2d 801 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

Claim of Miranda v. Division 1181 ATU—New York Welfare Fund & Plan

The majority reviewed the record and agreed with the Division. In so doing, however, the majority usurped the…

McQueer v. Adirondack Tank Servs., Inc.

We affirm. The Board's decisions on questions of fact and the inferences to be drawn therefrom “[are]…