Guna v. Delta Airlines, Inc.

202 A.D.3d 1190

163 N.Y.S.3d 299

In the Matter of the Claim of Stephanie GUNA, Claimant,

v.DELTA AIRLINES, INC., et al., Appellants.

Workers’ Compensation Board, Respondent.

532909

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Calendar Date: January 12, 2022

Decided and Entered: February 3, 2022

Cipriani & Werner, PC, Iselin, New Jersey (Marc Neuman of counsel), for appellants.

Letitia James, Attorney General, New York City (Marjorie S. Leff of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Lynch, J.P., Clark, Aarons and Reynolds Fitzgerald, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Aarons, J. Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed August 26, 2020, which ruled that claimant sustained a causally-related injury resulting from chemical exposure and established her claim for workers’ compensation benefits.

In January 2020, claimant, a flight attendant for an airline, filed a workers’ compensation claim alleging that she was exposed to chemicals in her work uniform, resulting in injuries related to the effects of chemical exposure, which included headaches, eye irritation and skin, upper respiratory and stomach problems. The claim was controverted on, among other grounds, the question of whether claimant's chemical exposure was causally related, and hearings and depositions ensued to address that issue. After considering the medical evidence and hearing testimony, a Workers’ Compensation Law Judge determined that claimant had suffered a work-related injury of chemical exposure and established the claim. Upon administrative review, the Workers’ Compensation Board affirmed, finding that the credible evidence in the record established that claimant suffered a causally-related injury involving chemical exposure, both directly through her own uniform and through proximal exposure to her coworkers’ uniforms. The employer and its workers’ compensation carrier (hereinafter collectively referred to as the carrier) appeal.

We affirm. "Whether a compensable accident has occurred is a question of fact to be resolved by the Board and its determination will not be disturbed when supported by substantial evidence" ( Matter of Issayou v. Issayuou Inc., 174 A.D.3d 1277, 1277, 105 N.Y.S.3d 616 [2019] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted], lv denied 34 N.Y.3d 909, 2020 WL 728741 [2020] ; see Matter of Hanley v. Trustees of Columbia Univ., 189 A.D.3d 1847, 1847, 138 N.Y.S.3d 249 [2020] ). "A claimant bears the burden of establishing, by competent medical evidence, a causal relationship between an [alleged] injury and his or her employment" ( Matter of Maldonado v. Doria, Inc., 192 A.D.3d 1247, 1248, 143 N.Y.S.3d 439 [2021] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]). "Moreover, the Board is vested with the discretion to assess the credibility of medical witnesses, and its resolution of such issues is to be accorded great deference, particularly with regard to issues of causation" ( Matter of Derouchie v. Massena W.–WC–Smelter, 160 A.D.3d 1310, 1311, 75 N.Y.S.3d 655 [2018] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see Matter of Hanley v. Trustees of Columbia Univ., 189 A.D.3d at 1848, 138 N.Y.S.3d 249 ).

Claimant testified that, prior to the issuance of her new uniform in May 2018, she had no allergies or any of the chemical-exposure symptoms that she quickly developed after first wearing the new uniform. Upon wearing the new uniform, claimant immediately experienced red rashes on her chest, and her skin itched everywhere. With continued use of the new uniform from May 2018 through June 2019, claimant's symptoms became progressively worse and included, among other things, skin rashes, watery and burning eyes, a cough, runny nose, tightness in her chest, difficulty breathing, heart palpitations and headaches.

In support of its finding that the new uniforms caused claimant's condition, the Board credited the opinion of Pamela...