Court Opinion

ID: 9747527
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-27 15:19:33.437526+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:25:24.362972
License: Public Domain

*206Pee Curiam.
The judgment is affirmed substantially for the reasons set forth in Judge Larner’s opinion for the Appellate Division.1
As to the issue of employment connection of the employee’s activity in the negotiation of a labor contract as shop steward, see the related discussion in our decision this day of Mikkelsen v. N. L. Industries, 72 N. J. 209 (1977).
With reference to the matter of the causal relation between the myocardial infarction sustained by the petitioner in April 1971 and that of November 1971, and the citation in the partial dissent of Schiffres v. Kittatinny Lodge, Inc., 39 N. J. 139 (1963), it is to be noted that the latter decision stressed the substantial time period between the two infarctions there (3½ years) and the different locations in the heart muscle infarcted. 39 N. J. at 147. In the instant case the time interval between infarctions was six months, and, according to the uncontradicted testimony of those physicians who addressed the point, which was given credence by the compensation judge, the same part of the myocardium was implicated both times. Here, too, two physicians furnished explicit physiological explanations for their conclusions of causal connection. Cf. 39 N. J. at 150. We cannot say the determination of causation by the compensation judge is not supported by sufficient credible evidence.
Judgment affirmed.

 This appeal is before the Court on certification. 69 N. J. 391 (1976);