Claim of Conyers v. Bar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Conyers v. Bar

38 A.D.2d 987, 329 N.Y.S.2d 168, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5246

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

DecidedMarch 1, 1972

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 38 A.D.2d 987 (Claim of Conyers v. Bar) 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 Conyers v. Bar, 38 A.D.2d 987, 329 N.Y.S.2d 168, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5246 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the employer and its insurance carrier from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, filed December 4, 1970, which awarded death benefits to the infant claimant. The board’s memoranda found “ that the claimant was performing his work as a bartender when he was shot by an unknown assailant and that, therefore, the accidental injury and death arose out of and in the course of employment ”, and by decision dated May 5, 1971 “ that the assault was not motivated by personal animosity and that the presumption, under section 21, subdivision 1 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law was not overcome by substantial evidence to the contrary ”. Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Herlihy, P. J., Greenblott, Cooke, Simons and Kane, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the employer and its insurance carrier from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, filed December 4, 1970, which awarded death benefits to the infant claimant. The board’s memoranda found “ that the claimant was performing his work as a bartender when he was shot by an unknown assailant and that, therefore, the accidental injury and death arose out of and in the course of employment ”, and by decision dated May 5, 1971 “ that the assault was not motivated by personal animosity and that the presumption, under section 21, subdivision 1 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law was not overcome by substantial evidence to the contrary ”. Decision affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Herlihy, P. J., Greenblott, Cooke, Simons and Kane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.D.2d 987, 329 N.Y.S.2d 168, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5246, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-conyers-v-bar-nyappdiv-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack