Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: the Claim of Carol McMILLAN, Respondent, v. Kathleen DODSWORTH et al., Appellants. Workers' Compensation Board, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Workers' Compensation Board, filed October 2, 1997, which ruled that claimant sustained a compensable injury and awarded workers' compensation benefits.
Claimant, a podiatrist's assistant, was on a break in the lunch room at her place of employment when her sister entered the room and repeatedly struck her with a hammer. The employer was aware that several weeks prior to the attack the sister, who had been under psychiatric care, visited claimant at the office and initiated a nonviolent argument with her. Although the employer had recently installed locks on the office doors in response to claimant's security concerns while she was working alone, the doors were unlocked at the time of the incident and the sister was able to gain access to the lunch room. Finding that claimant's work area gave rise to a risk which the employer had taken steps to minimize, the Workers' Compensation Board ruled that claimant's injury arose out of and in the course of her employment and awarded benefits.
We reverse. The undisputed evidence establishes that the assault stemmed from purely personal differences between claimant and her sister and was unrelated to claimant's work or the performance of her job duties (see, Matter of Robinson v. Village of Catskill Police Dept., 209 A.D.2d 748, 617 N.Y.S.2d 975, lv. denied 85 N.Y.2d 810, 628 N.Y.S.2d 53, 651 N.E.2d 921; Matter of Closson v. Dutchess County Sheriff's Dept., 179 A.D.2d 861, 577 N.Y.S.2d 976). Accordingly, for that reason and as there is insufficient proof that the podiatrist's office constituted a dangerous work environment inasmuch as there were no previous violent incidents, we are constrained to find that the Board's decision is not supported by substantial evidence and must be reversed (see, Matter of Russo v. HRT Inc. of Orange County, 246 A.D.2d 933, 667 N.Y.S.2d 854; Matter of Mintiks v. Metropolitan Opera Assn., 153 A.D.2d 133, 137, 550 N.Y.S.2d 143, appeal dismissed 75 N.Y.2d 1005, 557 N.Y.S.2d 311, 556 N.E.2d 1118).
ORDERED that the decision is reversed, without costs, and claim dismissed.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: October 22, 1998
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)