Claim of Edmonds v. D. Kalfaian & Son, Inc.

268 A.D. 838, 50 N.Y.S.2d 241, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3701
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedSeptember 20, 1944
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 268 A.D. 838 (Claim of Edmonds v. D. Kalfaian & Son, Inc.) 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 Edmonds v. D. Kalfaian & Son, Inc., 268 A.D. 838, 50 N.Y.S.2d 241, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3701 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1944).

Opinion

Appeal by claimant from a decision of the State Industrial Board disallowing his claim and closing the case. Claimant, an infant, was employed in a carpet-cleaning establishment and while operating a mangle machine to wring out some of his clothing which had become wet in the course of his employment, he caught his hand in the machine and received injuries as the result of which the left forearm had to be amputated. The claim was disallowed on the ground that claimant had been forbidden to operate this machine and that he was operating it for purposes foreign to the.interests of his employer and had stepped out of his employment. The evidence is highly unsatisfactory as to just what instructions had been given to claimant and who gave them, and we fail to find that he had been specifically forbidden to operate this machine. Also, his duties required that he help others to put rugs through this same machine. It is apparent that the purpose for which he was operating it, at the time of the accident, was connected with his employment and in the interests of the employer. In view of the highly unsatisfactory condition of the evidence and the serious nature of the injuries, the decision should be reversed and the matter remitted to the Industrial Board for the taking of such further evidence as may be adduced and a reconsideration of all of the evidence. Decision reversed, with costs to the appellant against the insurance carrier, and the matter remitted to the Industrial Board. All concur. [See post, p. 934.]

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

Related

Phoenix Indemnity Co. v. Willard
130 F. Supp. 657 (S.D. New York, 1955)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
268 A.D. 838, 50 N.Y.S.2d 241, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3701, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-edmonds-v-d-kalfaian-son-inc-nyappdiv-1944.