Claim of Goldman v. Press

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Goldman v. Press

5 A.D.2d 706, 168 N.Y.S.2d 638, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3496

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

DecidedDecember 19, 1957

StatusPublished

This text of 5 A.D.2d 706 (Claim of Goldman v. Press) 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 Goldman v. Press, 5 A.D.2d 706, 168 N.Y.S.2d 638, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3496 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board. In December, 1955 we remitted this claim to the Workmen’s Compensation Board for further consideration (1 A D 2d 706). We were of opinion that the findings were confused and uncertain as to whether or not, on March 2, 1951, in a fall due to a physical condition, decedent had struck an object in his fall and thus had incurred an industrial accident. These findings were made December 11, 1953 (memorandum) and April 4, 1955 (formal findings). The remission has resulted in a further memorandum of decision (October 17, 1956) and in further formal findings (March 5, 1957). These now find plainly and definitely that as decedent fell “ he struck his head upon a barrel or container ”, There is substantial evidence to sustain this finding and the finding meets the infirmity we found in the previous record. Award unanimously affirmed, with costs to [707]*707the Workmen’s Compensation Board.

Present — Foster, P. J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Gibson, JJ.

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

Appeal from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board. In December, 1955 we remitted this claim to the Workmen’s Compensation Board for further consideration (1 A D 2d 706). We were of opinion that the findings were confused and uncertain as to whether or not, on March 2, 1951, in a fall due to a physical condition, decedent had struck an object in his fall and thus had incurred an industrial accident. These findings were made December 11, 1953 (memorandum) and April 4, 1955 (formal findings). The remission has resulted in a further memorandum of decision (October 17, 1956) and in further formal findings (March 5, 1957). These now find plainly and definitely that as decedent fell “ he struck his head upon a barrel or container ”, There is substantial evidence to sustain this finding and the finding meets the infirmity we found in the previous record. Award unanimously affirmed, with costs to [707]*707the Workmen’s Compensation Board.

Present — Foster, P. J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Gibson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 A.D.2d 706, 168 N.Y.S.2d 638, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3496, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-goldman-v-press-nyappdiv-1957.