MARITZA BAEZ v. COUNTY OF ATLANTIC, MEADOWVIEW NURSING HOME, et al.

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-6970-03T56970-03T5

MARITZA BAEZ,

Petitioner-Respondent,

v.

COUNTY OF ATLANTIC,

MEADOWVIEW NURSING HOME,

Respondents,

and

PROGRESSIVE LIVING UNITS &

SYSTEMS (PLUS) OF NEW JERSEY,

AS INSURED BY LIBERTY MUTUAL

INSURANCE COMPANY,

Respondent-Appellant,

and

PROGRESSIVE LIVING UNITS &

SYSTEMS (PLUS) OF NEW JERSEY,

AS INSURED BY NEW JERSEY

MANUFACTURERS INSURANCE

COMPANY, and COUNTY OF ATLANTIC,

MEADOWVIEW NURSING HOME,

Respondent-Respondent.

________________________________________

 

Argued November 15, 2005 - Decided

Before Judges Skillman, Payne and Miniman.

On appeal from the State of New Jersey, Department of Labor, Division of Workers' Compensation, Claim Petition Nos. 2002-4204, 2000-11421, 2002-13548, 2002-40092, 2003-17099.

Kathleen L. Burghardt argued the cause for appellant (Styliades, Jackson, and Dimeo, attorneys; Ms. Burghardt, on the brief).

Lawrence A. Mintz argued the cause for respondent Maritza Baez (Goldenberg, Mackler, Sayegh, Mintz, Pfeffer, Bonchi & Gill, attorneys; Eric E. Fingerman, on the brief).

Francis T. Giuliano argued the cause for respondent Progressive Living Units & Systems (PLUS) of New Jersey.

PER CURIAM

Progressive Living Units & Systems (PLUS) of New Jersey, as insured by Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, appellant-respondent, appeals from the decision of Cosmo A. Giovinazzi, Judge of Workers' Compensation, that the injuries sustained by Maritza Baez, petitioner-respondent, while Liberty Mutual insured her employer were not idiopathic but rather arose out of the petitioner's employment. Liberty Mutual also appeals from Judge Giovinazzi's decision that those injuries were not "innocent aggravations" of prior workplace injuries as defined in Kozinsky v. Edison Products Co., 222 N.J. Super. 530, 532 (App. Div. 1988)(citation omitted).

Appellate review of the decision of a judge of Workers' Compensation is limited to "'whether the findings made could reasonably have been reached on sufficient credible evidence present in the record,' considering 'the proofs as a whole,' with due regard to the one who heard the witnesses to judge of their credibility . . . and, in the case of agency review, with due regard also to the agency's expertise where such expertise is a pertinent factor." Close v. Kordulak Brothers, 44 N.J. 589, 599 (1965).

We have reviewed the record in light of the written and oral arguments advanced by the parties and prevailing legal standards, and are in substantial agreement with Judge Giovinazzi's well-reasoned decision and find that it was grounded on sufficient credible evidence in the record. None of the issues presented by Liberty Mutual have sufficient merit to warrant discussion in a written opinion. See, R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(D), (E).

 
Accordingly, we affirm.

(continued)

(continued)

3

A-6970-03T5

December 16, 2005