jnrpirate.blogg.se

In response, the carrier raised a question of fraud and the case was reopened. Claimant thereafter completed two State Insurance Fund questionnaires, one in July 1997 and the other in January 1998, wherein he indicated, among other things, that he had not worked in any capacity since his injury and that his physical activities consisted of taking walks when able to do so. Go toĬlaimant sustained work-related injuries in January 1994 and subsequently was classified with a marked permanent partial disability and awarded benefits. As to penalty, the Board imposed the mandatory and discretionary penalties provided for in Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a (1) and disqualified claimant from receiving wage replacement benefits. Thus, the Board determined that claimant knowingly made a false statement for the purpose of ensuring a continued award of benefits. Upon review, a panel of the Workers' Compensation Board reversed, finding that contrary to the representations made by claimant in the January 1998 questionnaire, claimant engaged in work activities at his brother's business. Following various hearings, at which claimant, his brother and the investigators who conducted surveillance of claimant appeared and testified, a workers' compensation law judge found that although the evidence was insufficient to sustain a violation of Workers' Compensation Law § 114-a, the proof adduced established that claimant had a substantial wage earning capacity and had voluntarily removed himself from the labor market. Claimant sustained work-related injuries in January 1994 and subsequently was classified with a marked permanent partial disability and awarded benefits.