Claim of De Moranville v. Albany Seed Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of De Moranville v. Albany Seed Co.

268 A.D. 945, 51 N.Y.S.2d 355, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4341

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

DecidedNovember 22, 1944

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 268 A.D. 945 (Claim of De Moranville v. Albany Seed 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 De Moranville v. Albany Seed Co., 268 A.D. 945, 51 N.Y.S.2d 355, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4341 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1944).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from * decision of the State Industrial Board rescinding [946]*946previous decisions and restoring the case to the calendar for further consideration on the question of deficiency compensation. Claimant was injured and paid compensation for eight weeks. He then elected to sue a third party and commenced an action. His compenation case was marked “ closed pending third party action”. Negotiations for a settlement were pending and with the oral consent of the insurance carrier a settlement was made. Sometime thereafter application was made to restore the case to the calendar and for deficiency compensation. The Industrial Board has held that the carrier is estopped from asserting its rights under section 29 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law, requiring written consent to settling a third party action. Decision affirmed, with costs to the State Industrial Board. All concur.

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

Appeal from * decision of the State Industrial Board rescinding [946]*946previous decisions and restoring the case to the calendar for further consideration on the question of deficiency compensation. Claimant was injured and paid compensation for eight weeks. He then elected to sue a third party and commenced an action. His compenation case was marked “ closed pending third party action”. Negotiations for a settlement were pending and with the oral consent of the insurance carrier a settlement was made. Sometime thereafter application was made to restore the case to the calendar and for deficiency compensation. The Industrial Board has held that the carrier is estopped from asserting its rights under section 29 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law, requiring written consent to settling a third party action. Decision affirmed, with costs to the State Industrial Board. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

268 A.D. 945, 51 N.Y.S.2d 355, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4341, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-de-moranville-v-albany-seed-co-nyappdiv-1944.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack