Casey v. International Harvester Co. of America

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Casey v. International Harvester Co. of America

241 A.D. 643

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 15, 1934·Published

Opinion

Motion to dismiss appeal denied, with ten dollars costs to the appellant against the State Industrial Board. Claimant’s attorney is a party in interest who may appeal under section 23 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. (See Rawlings v. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Kentucky, 187 Ky. 308; 218 S. W. 985; Schilling v. Industrial Accident Commission of California, 47 Cal. App. 190; 190 Pac. 373.) McNamee, Bliss and Heflernan, JJ., concur; Hill, P. J., and Rhodes, J., dissent.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Motion to dismiss appeal denied, with ten dollars costs to the appellant against the State Industrial Board. Claimant’s attorney is a party in interest who may appeal under section 23 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. (See Rawlings v. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Kentucky, 187 Ky. 308; 218 S. W. 985; Schilling v. Industrial Accident Commission of California, 47 Cal. App. 190; 190 Pac. 373.) McNamee, Bliss and Heflernan, JJ., concur; Hill, P. J., and Rhodes, J., dissent.

Casey v. International Harvester Co. of America, 241 A.D. 643 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1934).

Pincite

241 A.D. 643 (Casey v. International Harvester Co. of America) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related