CompFox AI Summary
A claimant suffered two left knee injuries, first in 1999 and second in 2009, both while working as a lineman for a utility company. The first injury, covered by Alliance National Insurance Co., resulted in a 30% schedule loss of use for the left leg. The second injury, covered by Travelers Indemnity Company of America, led to a total bilateral knee replacement. The cost of left knee surgery was initially apportioned 80% to Alliance and 20% to Travelers. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) later ruled that this apportionment applied only to the increase in the schedule loss of use award, not the overall award. The WCLJ found an overall 50% loss of use, representing a 20% increase, and applied the apportionment to this increase, resulting in Alliance being responsible for 46% and Travelers for 4% of the overall award. Alliance appealed, arguing for apportionment of the overall award, but the Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed the WCLJ's decision. The appellate court further affirmed the Board's decision, declining to reconsider the method of apportionment.
Matter of Riescher v. Central Hudson Gas Electric is a workers' compensation case decided in Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
A claimant suffered two left knee injuries, first in 1999 and second in 2009, both while working as a lineman for a utility company. The first injury, covered by Alliance National Insurance Co., resulted in a 30% schedule loss of use for the left leg. The second injury, covered by Travelers Indemnity Company of America, led to a total bilateral knee replacement. The cost of left knee surgery was initially apportioned 80% to Alliance and 20% to Travelers. A Workers' Compensation Law Judge (WCLJ) later ruled that this apportionment applied only to the increase in the schedule loss of use award, not the overall award. The WCLJ found an overall 50% loss of use, representing a 20% increase, and applied the apportionment to this increase, resulting in Alliance being responsible for 46% and Travelers for 4% of the overall award. Alliance appealed, arguing for apportionment of the overall award, but the Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed the WCLJ's decision. The appellate court further affirmed the Board's decision, declining to reconsider the method of apportionment.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.