From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Claim of Ogden v. PCA International

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 9, 2006
26 A.D.3d 625 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

98653.

February 9, 2006.

Appeal from an amended decision of the Workers' Compensation Board, filed October 18, 2004, which ruled that claimant did not sustain a causally related disability and denied her claim for workers' compensation benefits.

Erwin, McCane Daly, Albany (J. Kevin Daly of counsel), for appellant.

Sullivan, Cunningham, Keenan, Mraz, Oliver Violando, Albany (John M. Oliver of counsel), for PCA International and another, respondents.

Before: Crew III, J.P., Peters, Mugglin and Rose, JJ., concur.


Claimant filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits alleging that she became disabled in April 2001 due to exposure to chemical fumes emanating from the carpeting, wallpaper and other materials at the newly constructed photography studio at which she had just begun working. After a workers' compensation law judge found the case to be compensable, the Workers' Compensation Board reversed, finding that the credible medical evidence demonstrated that there was no causal relationship between claimant's disability and her employment. This appeal by claimant ensued and we now affirm.

It is well settled that the resolution of conflicting medical opinions lies within the province of the Board ( see Matter of Casiano v. CCIP/Union Settlement Home Care, 19 AD3d 719, 721; Matter of Robinson v. New Venture Gear, 9 AD3d 571, 572-573). Here, although certain medical experts diagnosed claimant with an allergic reaction and opined that such a condition was causally linked to her exposure to chemical fumes while at work, contrary medical testimony was offered by another medical expert to the effect that claimant had not suffered a work-related allergic reaction but, instead, experienced a recurrence of Sweet's syndrome, a condition with which she had been diagnosed in 1997. Inasmuch as the Board was free to credit the latter medical opinion, we conclude that substantial evidence supports its determination and, therefore, decline to intervene ( see Matter of Keeley v. Jamestown City School Dist., 295 AD2d 876, 877).

Ordered that the amended decision is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Claim of Ogden v. PCA International

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 9, 2006
26 A.D.3d 625 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

Claim of Ogden v. PCA International

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of ROBIN OGDEN, Appellant, v. PCA INTERNATIONAL…

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

Date published: Feb 9, 2006

Citations

26 A.D.3d 625 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 1072
808 N.Y.S.2d 509

Citing Cases

Eleni Dimitriadis v. One Source

Furthermore, although there was evidence of a fracture in the thoracic spine, he testified that, based on a…

Cullen v. White Plains

The employer's expert offered a contrary opinion to the effect that claimant's partial knee replacement had…