Court Opinion

ID: 9875846
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-26 22:43:19.658869+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:47:05.881905
License: Public Domain

Aarons, J.
(dissenting). Because I agree with the contention by claimant’s employer and its workers’ compensation carrier that claimant is not entitled to an additional 100% schedule loss of use (hereinafter SLU) award for his right thumb on top of the 100% SLU award already awarded to claimant for the loss of all four fingers on his right hand, I respectfully dissent.
In determining that claimant could receive a 100% SLU for his right hand based upon the amputation of his four fingers, plus another 100% SLU for his right thumb, the Workers’ Compensation Board, in its amended decision, found that claimant’s “injuries are distinct, and are independently negatively impacting the use of his hand” and, therefore, the “thumb injury will be considered separately from his fingers.” To that end, “the [B]oard is not limited to a total schedule loss of 100%, but where supported by substantial medical evidence may assess each injury individually” (Matter of Pellegrino v Textile Prints Corp., 81 AD2d 723, 724 [1981]; cf. Matter of Bazzano v Ryan & Sons, 62 AD2d 260, 261 [1978]). In my view, substantial medical evidence was lacking.
While Paul Douglas Paterson, claimant’s surgeon, was the only medical professional to testify, when asked whether claimant had the functional use of his hand, Paterson responded that claimant’s right hand was “an assist hand” because all he could use it for was to pin something down. Paterson also testified that claimant “doesn’t have a hand.” Although the thumb is given special consideration (see New York State Guidelines for Determining Permanent Impairment and Loss of Wage Earning Capacity at 17 [2012]), absent from Paterson’s testimony was any explanation as to how the injury to claimant’s right thumb was a separate and distinct injury from the injury to the other four fingers. Such omission is critical especially where all of claimant’s fingers were amputated as a consequence of a single incident—i.e., claimant’s hand getting caught in a meat grinder. I further note that an award of 100% SLU for only the right hand is in accord with the New York State Guidelines for Determining Permanent Impairment and Loss of Wage Earning Capacity, inasmuch as the guidelines provide that “[l]oss of all fingers at proximal phalanges equals 100% loss of use of the hand” (New York State Guidelines for Determining Permanent Impairment and Loss of Wage Earning Capacity at 17 [2012]).
Because the Board’s determination was not supported by substantial evidence, I would reverse that part of the amended decision as awarded an additional 100% SLU for claimant’s right thumb.
*1602Ordered that the amended decision is affirmed, without costs.