Legal Opinion
Hinton v. Acme Steel & Malleable Iron Works
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided October 30, 1997PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtYesawich Jr., J.
Appeals from two decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed August 1, 1995 and July 15, 1996, which, inter alia, ruled that the reopening of the claim was not barred by Workers’ Compensation Law § 123.
Claimant was employed by Acme Steel & Malleable Iron Works at an occupation involving substantial exposure to airborne dust and particulates from 1950 until 1970. In July 1970, having sought medical attention for breathing difficulties and been diagnosed as suffering from silicosis, claimant left his job, as advised by his doctor, and filed for workers’ compensation benefits. After a…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Claim of Kroeger v. New York State Workers' Compensation BoardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Claim of Ronda v. Edenwald ContractingAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Claim of Bishop v. St. Joe MineralsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Claim of Scimeni v. Welbilt Stove Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1969
- Claim of Blair v. Bendix Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1995
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Fama v. P & M SorbaraAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Leary v. NYC Board of EducationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007