Claim of Adams v. Aluminum Co. of America

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Adams v. Aluminum Co. of America

282 A.D. 1088, 126 N.Y.S.2d 671, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5887

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 8, 1953

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 282 A.D. 1088 (Claim of Adams v. Aluminum Co. of America) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Claim of Adams v. Aluminum Co. of America, 282 A.D. 1088, 126 N.Y.S.2d 671, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5887 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by a self-insured employer from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board which relieved the Special Fund for Reopened Cases of liability to claimant. The sole issue on appeal is whether a payment of $185.36, made by appellant to claimant on January 27, 1948, for the sole purpose of correcting a mistake made by the board in computing the amount due under an award made April 12, 1946, constitutes a payment of compensation made [1089]*1089less than three years prior to claimant’s application to reopen the claim within the meaning o£ section 25-a of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. We think the language of the section is decisive. It says in part: “For the purposes of this section the date of the last payment of compensation shall be deemed to mean the date of actual payment of the last installment of compensation previously awarded”. Decision unanimously affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Present — Foster, P. J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Xmrie, JJ.

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

— Appeal by a self-insured employer from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board which relieved the Special Fund for Reopened Cases of liability to claimant. The sole issue on appeal is whether a payment of $185.36, made by appellant to claimant on January 27, 1948, for the sole purpose of correcting a mistake made by the board in computing the amount due under an award made April 12, 1946, constitutes a payment of compensation made [1089]*1089less than three years prior to claimant’s application to reopen the claim within the meaning o£ section 25-a of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. We think the language of the section is decisive. It says in part: “For the purposes of this section the date of the last payment of compensation shall be deemed to mean the date of actual payment of the last installment of compensation previously awarded”. Decision unanimously affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Present — Foster, P. J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Xmrie, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 A.D. 1088, 126 N.Y.S.2d 671, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5887, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-adams-v-aluminum-co-of-america-nyappdiv-1953.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack