Matter of Sarbo v. Tri-Valley Plumbing & Heating , 39 N.Y.S.3d 846 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                           State of New York
    Supreme Court, Appellate Division
    Third Judicial Department
    Decided and Entered:   November 3, 2016                520972
    521386
    521973
    ________________________________
    In the Matter of the Claim of
    MICHAEL SARBO,
    Respondent,
    v
    TRI-VALLEY PLUMBING & HEATING               MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
    et al.,
    Appellants.
    WORKERS' COMPENSATION BOARD,
    Respondent.
    ________________________________
    Calendar Date:   September 14, 2016
    Before:   McCarthy, J.P., Lynch, Rose, Devine and Mulvey, JJ.
    __________
    William O'Brien, State Insurance Fund, Albany (Edward
    Obertubbesing of counsel), for appellants.
    Buckley, Mendleson, Criscione & Quinn, PC, Albany (Brendan
    G. Quinn of counsel), for Michael Sarbo, respondent.
    Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York City
    (Donya Fernandez of counsel), for Workers' Compensation Board,
    respondent.
    __________
    -2-                520972
    521386
    521973
    Lynch, J.
    Appeals (1) from a decision of the Workers' Compensation
    Board, filed August 8, 2014, which ruled, among other things,
    that claimant sustained a permanent partial disability and a 60%
    loss of wage-earning capacity, and (2) from two amended decisions
    of said Board, filed July 10, 2015 and October 29, 2015, which,
    upon reconsideration, among other things, clarified the Board's
    prior decision.
    In August 2010, claimant, a sheet metal installer,
    sustained a compensable work-related injury to his back. After a
    hearing in February 2011, a Workers' Compensation Law Judge
    (hereinafter WCLJ) found that claimant's average weekly wage
    before the injury was $1,302.86. Claimant did not return to
    work. Following a hearing in October 2013, a WCLJ adopted an
    independent medical examiner's determination that claimant had a
    permanent partial class 3, severity B impairment (see New York
    State Guidelines for Determining Permanent Impairment and Loss of
    Wage Earning Capacity, table 18.1 [2012]). Based on that
    impairment, the WCLJ found that claimant had a wage-earning
    capacity of 50% (see Workers' Compensation Law § 15 [5-a]) and,
    after considering that claimant was 43 years old, had an eleventh
    grade education and had only worked as a manual laborer,
    determined that claimant had a loss of wage-earning capacity of
    55% (see Workers' Compensation Law § 15 [3] [w]). Claimant was
    awarded continuing payments at a rate of $434.29 per week for a
    period not to exceed 350 weeks (see Workers' Compensation Law
    § 15 [3] [w] [viii]).
    In a sequence of three decisions, culminating in its
    October 2015 amended decision, the Workers' Compensation Board
    modified the award by increasing claimant's loss of wage-earning
    capacity to 60%, while reducing his wage-earning capacity to 40%.
    In so doing, the Board concluded that vocational factors could be
    considered in fixing claimant's wage-earning capacity under
    Workers' Compensation Law § 15 (5-a). As a result, claimant's
    weekly rate was raised to $521.14. The employer and its workers'
    compensation carrier have appealed all three Board decisions.
    -3-                  520972
    521386
    521973
    The sole issue on this appeal is whether the Board was
    authorized to consider vocational factors in fixing claimant's
    wage-earning capacity for purposes of computing the rate of
    compensation.1 For the reasons set forth in Matter of Rosales v
    Eugene J. Felice Landscaping (___ AD3d ___ [decided herewith]),
    we conclude that the Board was so authorized and that there was
    substantial evidence to support the Board's determination that
    claimant had a wage-earning capacity of 40%.
    McCarthy, J.P., Rose, Devine and Mulvey, JJ., concur.
    ORDERED that the decision and amended decisions are
    affirmed, without costs.
    ENTER:
    Robert D. Mayberger
    Clerk of the Court
    1
    In his brief, claimant advises that he returned to work
    on or about March 31, 2014 and that the award from that point
    forward has been calculated based on his actual earnings (see
    Workers' Compensation Law § 15 [5-a]). As such, the issue here
    narrows to the proper rate of compensation for the period from
    October 1, 2013 to October 31, 2014.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 520972, 521386, 521973

Citation Numbers: 144 A.D.3d 1219, 39 N.Y.S.3d 846

Judges: Lynch, McCarthy, Rose, Devine, Mulvey

Filed Date: 11/3/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 11/1/2024