![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]>
Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.
LexisNexis® CLE On-Demand features premium content from partners like American Law Institute Continuing Legal Education and Pozner & Dodd. Choose from a broad listing of topics suited for law firms, corporate legal departments, and government entities. Individual courses and subscriptions available.
Observing that the state's Workers' Compensation Board had found the claimant's testimony credible, according to which the claimant's supervisor "stormed off" when the claimant advised that he would be filing a workers' compensation claim, and that the supervisor also muttered that the boss would not be "very happy with that," a New York appellate court found substantial evidence supported the Board's finding that the claimant's firing -- shortly after the incident -- was retaliatory and violated N.Y. Workers' Comp. Law § 120. While the supervisor testified he had not so reacted to the news of the potential claim, the Board found that testimony not to be credible. It was not for the appellate court to weigh the evidence.
Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is co-author of Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law (LexisNexis).
LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance.
See Matter of Markey v. Autosaver Ford, 2020 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1923 (3d Dept., Mar. 16, 2020)
See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 104.07.
Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law
For a more detailed discussion of the case, see
Sign up for the free LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation enewsletter at www.lexisnexis.com/wcnews.