From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Mennis v. Amendes Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 20, 1977
59 A.D.2d 794 (N.Y. App. Div. 1977)

Opinion

October 20, 1977


Appeal from a supplemental decision of the Workmen's Compensation Board, filed July 20, 1977, which determined that claimants were not dependents of the deceased employee and, therefore, denied their claim for death benefits. By an amended decision of this court (Matter of Mennis v Amendes Co., 56 A.D.2d 679) this case was remitted to the Workmen's Compensation Board for additional findings in clarification of its prior decision denying death benefits to claimants. On remittal the board found, in support of its decision denying benefits, that the testimony of the decedent's parents and brother concerning claimants' dependency on decedent was not credible. A reading of the record reveals inconsistencies and contradictions in the testimony of these witnesses. The question of credibility is strictly within the province of the board and its determination on questions of fact and credibility may not be disturbed by this court (Matter of Carpenter v Ceramic Systems, 44 A.D.2d 348; Matter of Walker v Frouge Constr. Co., 24 A.D.2d 775; Matter of Giocastro v New York City Tr. Auth., 24 A.D.2d 679). Since substantial evidence supports the board's determination, it must be affirmed (Matter of Maurer v Terminal Serv. Co., 46 A.D.2d 709). Decision affirmed, without costs. Greenblott, J.P., Sweeney, Main, Larkin and Herlihy, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Mennis v. Amendes Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 20, 1977
59 A.D.2d 794 (N.Y. App. Div. 1977)
Case details for

Matter of Mennis v. Amendes Co.

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of MARIA MENNIS et al., Appellants, v. AMENDES…

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

Date published: Oct 20, 1977

Citations

59 A.D.2d 794 (N.Y. App. Div. 1977)

Citing Cases

Matter of Wall v. Premium Transport Service

I am unable to agree with the result reached by the majority and, therefore, dissent and vote to affirm. In…

Matter of Sanderson v. Curley

The carrier's consultant testified that there was no causal relationship between the disability and…