New York: Equivocal Medical Testimony Sinks Claim for Myocardial Infarction

A New York appellate court held sufficient evidence supported the Board's determination that a worker's myocardial infarction was not causally connected to his employment, where the worker's expert opined that it was "possible" that claimant's work activities "might" have contributed to his myocardial infarction. The expert acknowledged on cross-examination that claimant may have already developed a blockage prior to a claimed incident in March 2016. At most, there was a conflict in the medical evidence and the Board was within its powers to give greater weight to the employer's expert testimony.

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 Rossi v. Albert Pearlman Inc., 2020 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6629 (3d Dept. Nov. 12, 2020)

See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 130.06.

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.