Claim of Calka v. Mamaroneck Lodge BPOE

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Calka v. Mamaroneck Lodge BPOE

285 A.D. 1093, 139 N.Y.S.2d 316, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6756

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

DecidedApril 1, 1955

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 285 A.D. 1093 (Claim of Calka v. Mamaroneck Lodge BPOE) 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 Calka v. Mamaroneck Lodge BPOE, 285 A.D. 1093, 139 N.Y.S.2d 316, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6756 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board disallowing a claim by a widow and minor child for death benefits. The deceased was employed as a steward by the Mainaroneck Lodge of Elks. On the day of the accident, at about 4:00 p.m., he drove to White Plains, some six miles distant, and met an officer of the lodge who intended to aid the decedent in purchasing meat for use at the lodge. The butcher shop which they desired to patronize was closed when they reached it, so they proceeded to a tavern where, after having some refreshments, the lodge officer separated from the decedent. The decedent drank three or four bottles of beer before leaving the tavern about 5:45 p.m. It does not appear where he went immediately thereafter but at 8:20 p.m. a witness saw the decedent driving his automobile very fast on a two-lane divided highway between White Plains and Mamaroneck. No other vehicle was in sight. The witness heard a screeching of brakes and saw the decedent’s vehicle strike an island and then crash into a tree. The impact killed the decedent. An examination of his blood disclosed an alcoholic content of .29%. (Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 70, subd. 5, declares that evidence of the presence of the .15% of alcohol in the blood is prima facie proof of intoxication.) A pathologist expressed an opinion that the decedent was intoxicated at the time of his death. The board found that the accident was due solely to the decedent’s intoxication and, pursuant to the dictate of section 10 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law, disallowed the claim. The proof of intoxication considered with the manner in which the accident happened constitutes the substantial evidence required to overcome the presumption found in section 21 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law that the accident did not result solely from the intoxication of the employee. Matter of Shannon v. American Can Go. (278 App. Div. 546) is distinguishable upon the facts. Decision unanimously affirmed, without costs. Present — Foster, P. J., Bergan, Halpern, Imrie and Zeller, JJ.

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

Appeal from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board disallowing a claim by a widow and minor child for death benefits. The deceased was employed as a steward by the Mainaroneck Lodge of Elks. On the day of the accident, at about 4:00 p.m., he drove to White Plains, some six miles distant, and met an officer of the lodge who intended to aid the decedent in purchasing meat for use at the lodge. The butcher shop which they desired to patronize was closed when they reached it, so they proceeded to a tavern where, after having some refreshments, the lodge officer separated from the decedent. The decedent drank three or four bottles of beer before leaving the tavern about 5:45 p.m. It does not appear where he went immediately thereafter but at 8:20 p.m. a witness saw the decedent driving his automobile very fast on a two-lane divided highway between White Plains and Mamaroneck. No other vehicle was in sight. The witness heard a screeching of brakes and saw the decedent’s vehicle strike an island and then crash into a tree. The impact killed the decedent. An examination of his blood disclosed an alcoholic content of .29%. (Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 70, subd. 5, declares that evidence of the presence of the .15% of alcohol in the blood is prima facie proof of intoxication.) A pathologist expressed an opinion that the decedent was intoxicated at the time of his death. The board found that the accident was due solely to the decedent’s intoxication and, pursuant to the dictate of section 10 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law, disallowed the claim. The proof of intoxication considered with the manner in which the accident happened constitutes the substantial evidence required to overcome the presumption found in section 21 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law that the accident did not result solely from the intoxication of the employee. Matter of Shannon v. American Can Go. (278 App. Div. 546) is distinguishable upon the facts. Decision unanimously affirmed, without costs. Present — Foster, P. J., Bergan, Halpern, Imrie and Zeller, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

285 A.D. 1093, 139 N.Y.S.2d 316, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6756, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-calka-v-mamaroneck-lodge-bpoe-nyappdiv-1955.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack