Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> New York Public Personnel Law

Labor & Employment Law

: New York Public Personnel Law

Workers? Compensation benefits for injury suffered after falling from hotel roof denied as not having arisen in the course employment

Workers? Compensation benefits for injury suffered after falling from hotel roof denied as not having arisen in the course employment
Matter of Maher v NYS Div. of Budget, 2010 NY Slip Op 03216, Decided on April 22, 2010, Appellate Division, Third Department

Emily B. Mahar, a New York State Budget Examiner, was unsuccessful in her appeal of a determination by the Workers' Compensation Board that Mahar's injury did not arise out of and in the course of her employment, thereby rejecting her claim for workers' compensation benefits.

Mahar filed a claim for workers' compensation benefits after she fell from a second-story roof at while attending a training conference.

Although a Workers' Compensation Law Judge found the claim to be compensable and awarded Mahar benefits, the Workers' Compensation Board disagreed, holding that Mahar had ?deviated from her employment by climbing out onto [a hotel] roof, that such action was not reasonable and, hence, [Mahar?s] injury did not arise out of and in the course of her employment.

In affirming the Board determination, the Appellate Division noted that after attending the first day of a two-day training conference and the employer-sponsored dinner, Mahar and two coworkers stepped out onto the roof of the hotel sometime in the course of the evening. The roof, said the court, was accessible only through the bathroom window in the hotel suite. While on the roof Mahar placed her hands on the railing surrounding the roof, heard a loud crack and fell to the ground below.

The court said that for an injury to be compensable, it must arise out of and in the course of employment. Whether a particular activity is compensable is a factual issue for the Board to resolve, "with the test being whether the activit[y] [is] both reasonable and sufficiently work related under the circumstances."

Based on its review of the record as a whole, the Appellate Division said that it was not persuaded that the Board erred in concluding that Mahar's conduct ? accessing the hotel roof via the bathroom window ? was unreasonable under the circumstances.

The decision is posted on the Internet at: http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2010/2010_03216.htm

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on April 27, 2010 (boomark / email).