Claim of Flicker v. Mac Sign Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Flicker v. Mac Sign Co.

227 A.D. 673

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

DecidedSeptember 15, 1929

StatusPublished

This text of 227 A.D. 673 (Claim of Flicker v. Mac Sign 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 Flicker v. Mac Sign Co., 227 A.D. 673 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

Opinions

[674]*674Award affirmed, with costs to the State Industrial Board, on the authority of Matter of Bernstein v. Hoffman (219 App. Div. 152); Matter of Rubenstein v. Pechter Baking Co. (224 id. 324; affd., 249 N. Y. 433); Matter of Wells v. General Carbonic Co. (224 App. Div. 805); Matter of Rounds v. Davis Furniture Co. (250 N. Y. 405). The toe is recognized by the statute (Workmen’s Comp. Law, § 15, subd. 3, ¶ h) as a member separate and apart from the foot (Workmen’s Comp. Law, §. 15, subd. 3, ¶ d) and an injury to the toe and also to ankle of the same foot is properly compensated under paragraph u of subdivision 3 of section 15 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. Hinman, Davis, Whitmyer and Hill, JJ., concur; Van Kirk, P. J., dissents, and votes for reversal and to remit claim, with a memorandum.

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

[674]*674Award affirmed, with costs to the State Industrial Board, on the authority of Matter of Bernstein v. Hoffman (219 App. Div. 152); Matter of Rubenstein v. Pechter Baking Co. (224 id. 324; affd., 249 N. Y. 433); Matter of Wells v. General Carbonic Co. (224 App. Div. 805); Matter of Rounds v. Davis Furniture Co. (250 N. Y. 405). The toe is recognized by the statute (Workmen’s Comp. Law, § 15, subd. 3, ¶ h) as a member separate and apart from the foot (Workmen’s Comp. Law, §. 15, subd. 3, ¶ d) and an injury to the toe and also to ankle of the same foot is properly compensated under paragraph u of subdivision 3 of section 15 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. Hinman, Davis, Whitmyer and Hill, JJ., concur; Van Kirk, P. J., dissents, and votes for reversal and to remit claim, with a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

227 A.D. 673, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-flicker-v-mac-sign-co-nyappdiv-1929.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack