Case Name: In the Matter of the Claim of Edith Speregon, Respondent, v. Downtown Delicatessen, Inc., et al., Appellants. Workmen's Compensation Board, Respondent
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1966-09-29
Citations: 18 N.Y.2d 736
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of the Claim of Edith Speregon, Respondent, v. Downtown Delicatessen, Inc., et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.
Judges: Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Fuld, Bubke, Bebgan and Keating. Judges Van Voobhis and Scileppi dissent and vote to reverse and to dismiss the claim upon the following ground: There ivas insufficient medical testimony to establish a causal relationship. The operating neurosurgeon testified to no causal relationship and the only evidence adduced to support it was by an expert witness qualified only in other fields whose opinion was purely speculative.
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 18
Pages: 736–738

Head Matter:
In the Matter of the Claim of Edith Speregon, Respondent, v. Downtown Delicatessen, Inc., et al., Appellants. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.
Argued September 20, 1966;
decided September 29, 1966.
Anne Powell, Joseph Dean Edwards and Ann W. Koenig for appellants.
Edwin Kaufman for claimant-respondent.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney-General (Julius Fell, Ruth Kessler Toch and Daniel Polanslcy of counsel) for Workmen’s Compensation Board, respondent.

Opinion:
Order affirmed, Avith costs; no opinion.
Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Fuld, Bubke, Bebgan and Keating. Judges Van Voobhis and Scileppi dissent and vote to reverse and to dismiss the claim upon the following ground: There ivas insufficient medical testimony to establish a causal relationship. The operating neurosurgeon testified to no causal relationship and the only evidence adduced to support it was by an expert witness qualified only in other fields whose opinion was purely speculative.