Claim of Charlebois v. Brockway

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Charlebois v. Brockway

209 A.D.2d 798, 618 N.Y.S.2d 478, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11104

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

DecidedNovember 10, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 209 A.D.2d 798 (Claim of Charlebois v. Brockway) 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 Charlebois v. Brockway, 209 A.D.2d 798, 618 N.Y.S.2d 478, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11104 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed April 1, 1993, which ruled that an employer-employee relationship existed between claimant and Lawrence Brockway.

Claimant was paid weekly in cash by Lawrence Brockway for his work in building cement walls. There was testimony to support the Board’s findings that Brockway directed claimant [799]*799as to the work to be performed, paid claimant an hourly wage and provided claimant with tools and forms. Although there was also some contradictory testimony, based upon our review of the record as a whole it cannot be said that the Board’s finding of an employment relationship is not supported by substantial evidence.

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, Casey and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

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

—Appeal from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board, filed April 1, 1993, which ruled that an employer-employee relationship existed between claimant and Lawrence Brockway.

Claimant was paid weekly in cash by Lawrence Brockway for his work in building cement walls. There was testimony to support the Board’s findings that Brockway directed claimant [799]*799as to the work to be performed, paid claimant an hourly wage and provided claimant with tools and forms. Although there was also some contradictory testimony, based upon our review of the record as a whole it cannot be said that the Board’s finding of an employment relationship is not supported by substantial evidence.

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, Casey and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 A.D.2d 798, 618 N.Y.S.2d 478, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11104, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-charlebois-v-brockway-nyappdiv-1994.