Legal Opinion

Claim of Groth v. Daimler Chrysler Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided June 14, 2007PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKane, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed June 1, 2006, which ruled that the employer is entitled to reimbursement for certain benefits paid to claimant.

Claimant suffered a work-related injury in April 2002. Pursuant to a union contract, the employer continued paying claimant his wages, a portion of which would equal workers’ compensa*1022tion benefits and the remainder “top off’ benefits from its sickness and accident (hereinafter S & A) benefits plan. Following a hearing, in January 2003 a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge (hereinafter WCLJ) awarded claimant temporary…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Claim of Karl v. New Venture GearAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
  2. Claim of Pratt v. Pratt Plumbing & HeatingAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Claim of Karl v. New Venture GearAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
  2. Matter of O'Brien v. Albany County Sheriff's DepartmentAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
  3. Dobney v. Eastman Kodak Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
  4. Dobney v. Eastman Kodak Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
  5. MatterofDobneyvEastmanKodakCompanyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API