Claim of Adams v. Max Solomon Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Adams v. Max Solomon Co.

265 A.D. 427, 39 N.Y.S.2d 492, 1943 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6315

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

DecidedJanuary 13, 1943

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 265 A.D. 427 (Claim of Adams v. Max Solomon Co.) 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. Max Solomon Co., 265 A.D. 427, 39 N.Y.S.2d 492, 1943 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6315 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appeal from an award of death benefits. The employer is a Pennsylvania corporation, engaged in the business of dismantling obsolete industrial plants, with its principal place of business in the city of Pittsburgh. It has no plant or office in the State of New York, and workmen are paid from Pittsburgh. It carried compensation insurance in Pennsylvania, but had no New York insurance. In the latter part of April, 1935, it began its contract to demolish the plant of the Niagara Radiator Co. at North Tonawanda, N. Y. In May claimant’s husband was employed for the work. The interview resulting in the employment took place at Erie, Pennsylvania. He began work at North Tonawanda the last days of May, was injured on July 8th, and died on August 3, 1935. The award under the New York State statute was proper. (Matter of Copeland v. Foundation Co., 256 N. Y. 568; Matter of Amaxis v. N. A. Vassilaros, Inc., 258 N. Y. 544; Matter of Zeltoski v. Osborne Drilling Corp., 264 N. Y. 496; Matter of Grasso v. Donaldson-Reynolds, Inc., 279 N. Y. 584; Matter of Bagdalik v. Flexlume Corp., 281 N. Y. 858; Matter of Jensen v. Boudin Contracting Corp., 283 N. Y. 572.)

The award should be affirmed, with costs to the State Industrial Board.

All concur.

Award affirmed, with costs to the State Industrial Board.

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

Per Curiam.

Appeal from an award of death benefits. The employer is a Pennsylvania corporation, engaged in the business of dismantling obsolete industrial plants, with its principal place of business in the city of Pittsburgh. It has no plant or office in the State of New York, and workmen are paid from Pittsburgh. It carried compensation insurance in Pennsylvania, but had no New York insurance. In the latter part of April, 1935, it began its contract to demolish the plant of the Niagara Radiator Co. at North Tonawanda, N. Y. In May claimant’s husband was employed for the work. The interview resulting in the employment took place at Erie, Pennsylvania. He began work at North Tonawanda the last days of May, was injured on July 8th, and died on August 3, 1935. The award under the New York State statute was proper. (Matter of Copeland v. Foundation Co., 256 N. Y. 568; Matter of Amaxis v. N. A. Vassilaros, Inc., 258 N. Y. 544; Matter of Zeltoski v. Osborne Drilling Corp., 264 N. Y. 496; Matter of Grasso v. Donaldson-Reynolds, Inc., 279 N. Y. 584; Matter of Bagdalik v. Flexlume Corp., 281 N. Y. 858; Matter of Jensen v. Boudin Contracting Corp., 283 N. Y. 572.)

The award should be affirmed, with costs to the State Industrial Board.

All concur.

Award affirmed, with costs to the State Industrial Board.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

265 A.D. 427, 39 N.Y.S.2d 492, 1943 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6315, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-adams-v-max-solomon-co-nyappdiv-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack