Claimant initially reported to his employer and two physicians that he sustained the injury when he slipped and fell on ice on the premises of the employer. Claimant injured his knee during an altercation with a coworker which occurred at the conclusion of his shift on the employer's premises.Trigen-Cinergy Solutions of Rochester, 14 AD3d 748, 749, lv dismissed 4 NY3d 881 Matter of Phelps v. Asbestos Free, supra at 266-267 Matter of Dieter v. Inasmuch as the Board provided sufficient explanation for its decision to disqualify claimant from wage replacement benefits, we will not disturb its imposition of this discretionary penalty specifically authorized by the statute ( see Matter of Losurdo v. New York City Sheriff's Off., supra at 790 Matter of Michaels v. Claimant's testimony that his motivation for lying was to protect his coworker from reprimand rather than to protect himself or ensure his receipt of workers' compensation benefits presented a credibility issue which the Board was free to decide against him ( see Matter of Amster v. It is undisputed that claimant knowingly made a false statement in connection with his claim and only admitted the truth upon his coworker's refusal to participate in the deception. Additionally, a claimant's false statement need not affect the compensability of the injury to be material and thus constitute a violation under Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a rather, it need only be significant to the existence of his or her claim ( see Matter of Losurdo v. New York City Sheriff's Off., 17 AD3d 789, 790 Matter of Michaels v. Eastport Manor Constr., 19 AD3d 826, 828 Matter of Amster v.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |