New York: Decision Reversed Where Board Misread Record Regarding Expert Testimony

Noting that the Board was free to reject the medical opinion offered by the claimant’s expert and credit one rendered by an independent medical examiner, a New York appellate court held that the Board was not, however, free to misread the record in doing so. The Court indicated that here, the Board held that claimant’s expert could not offer an opinion on causation because he was not familiar with claimant's work duties. It overlooked the fact that the expert maintained that medical opinion of causation after being advised of specific work duties described by claimant in her testimony. Because the appellate court lacked the authority independently to weigh the conflicting proof in the case and, unable as was to discern what role, if any, the inaccurate reading of the record played in the Board's decision, the Court reversed it.

Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is the co-author of Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law (LexisNexis).

LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance.

See Matter of Gullo v. Wireless Northeast, 2018 N.Y. App. LEXIS 2375 (Apr. 5, 2018)

See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 130.05.

Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law