Legal Opinion
Claim of McQueen v. New York State Division of Parole
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 18, 1997PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCasey, J.
Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed November 28, 1995, which, inter alia, ruled that the Special Fund for Reopened Cases is not liable for the claim under Workers’ Compensation Law § 25-a.
Claimant, a senior typist for the State Division of Parole, sustained injuries to her neck and back in October 1984 during an automobile accident which occurred while she was en route to an agency-authorized training session. As a result, claimant was awarded workers’ compensation benefits for the time she missed from work. In April 1988, upon the settlement of her third-party…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Matter of Casey v. Hinkle Iron WorksNew York Court of Appeals · 1949
- Claim of Loiacono v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- Claim of Dennett v. Dennett Refrigeration EquipmentAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1971
- Claim of Cordell v. City of Oneida Youth DivisionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Claim of Totino v. Helann Trucking Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Claim of Bates v. Finger Lakes Truck RentalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Claim of Jones v. HSBCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Claim of Andrus v. Purolator ProductsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Claim of Hantz v. Brightman AgencyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Claim of Beder v. Big Apple CircusAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011