A New York appeals court on Thursday reversed a state Workers’ Compensation Board decision that denied benefits to a longtime Suffolk County Water Authority employee who alleged he developed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome from decades of repetitive hand use.
Frank McGann worked for the Water Authority for 32 years, retiring in 2021 after serving as a senior meter reader, as documented in Matter of McGann v. Suffolk County Water Auth., filed in the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Third Department.
Mr. McGann later sought treatment for bilateral hand and wrist pain, reporting that his symptoms had progressively worsened during the final two years of his employment. He was diagnosed with bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. Both his treating physician and the employer’s orthopedic consultant concluded, after reviewing medical records and electromyography results, that the condition was causally related to years of gripping, twisting, and manipulating tools during meter inspections and valve operations.
A Workers’ Compensation Law Judge accepted the claim, but the employer, a self-insured entity, raised credibility issues, asserting that Mr. McGann failed to disclose that he played pickleball after retirement.
The judge ordered addenda to the medical reports addressing Mr. McGann’s recreational activity and job-duty testimony. Both physicians reaffirmed their causation opinions even after considering the pickleball information.
On administrative appeal, the Board reversed, rejecting both medical opinions as unreliable and finding insufficient credible evidence of an occupational disease. The appellate court overturned that ruling, holding that the board had misread or disregarded the record.
Citing precedent barring the board from “totally reject[ing] uncontroverted medical testimony” and substituting its own medical conclusions, the court found no basis to discount the physicians’ addendums, which addressed the very concerns raised by the employer.
The record, it said, demonstrated consistent symptom reporting, corroborated job-duty evidence, and physician awareness of both prior injuries and recreational activities. “Although the Board may disregard medical opinions as incredible or insufficient, it is not free to misread the record and fashion its own medical opinion,” the appeals court wrote.
Finding the board’s decision unsupported by substantial evidence, the court reversed and remitted the matter for further proceedings.