Claim of Goldstein v. Marc Eidlitz & Son, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Goldstein v. Marc Eidlitz & Son, Inc.

240 A.D. 925

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 15, 1933·Published

Opinion

Award reversed and claim dismissed, with costs against the State Industrial Board, on the ground that the New York Machinery Wrecking and Boiler Cutting Company was a purchaser of the material and not a subcontractor. Hill, P. J., Crapser and Heffernan, JJ., concur; Rhodes and McNamee, JJ., dissent on the ground that the New York Machinery Wrecking and Boiler Cutting Company was doing the work contracted to be done by the general contractor, Mare Eidlitz & Son, Incorporated, and, therefore, was a subcontractor.

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

Award reversed and claim dismissed, with costs against the State Industrial Board, on the ground that the New York Machinery Wrecking and Boiler Cutting Company was a purchaser of the material and not a subcontractor. Hill, P. J., Crapser and Heffernan, JJ., concur; Rhodes and McNamee, JJ., dissent on the ground that the New York Machinery Wrecking and Boiler Cutting Company was doing the work contracted to be done by the general contractor, Mare Eidlitz & Son, Incorporated, and, therefore, was a subcontractor.

Claim of Goldstein v. Marc Eidlitz & Son, Inc., 240 A.D. 925 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

240 A.D. 925 (Claim of Goldstein v. Marc Eidlitz & Son, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.