Claim of Helmer v. Savin Bros.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Helmer v. Savin Bros.

38 A.D.2d 641, 327 N.Y.S.2d 315, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2670

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

DecidedDecember 20, 1971

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 38 A.D.2d 641 (Claim of Helmer v. Savin Bros.) 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 Helmer v. Savin Bros., 38 A.D.2d 641, 327 N.Y.S.2d 315, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2670 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the claimant from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, filed October 27, 1970, which affirmed a Referee’s finding that the claimant was not the legal widow of the deceased. The board found as follows: “Hpon review of the entire record, the Board finds that the social visits to State of Pennsylvania that the deceased and Mrs. Eva Helmer had made on several occasions was not for the purpose of establishing a common-law marriage in such state and therefore Mrs. Eva Helmer is not the statutory widow of deceased entitled to death benefits.” The present record does not factually establish the necessary requirements to consummate a common-law marriage in the State of Pennsylvania. (See Donaldson v. Oesterling & Sons, 28 Pa. D. & C. 2d 583, affd. 199 Pa. Super. Ct. 637.) Decision affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Staley, Jr., Cooke, Sweeney and Simons, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the claimant from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board, filed October 27, 1970, which affirmed a Referee’s finding that the claimant was not the legal widow of the deceased. The board found as follows: “Hpon review of the entire record, the Board finds that the social visits to State of Pennsylvania that the deceased and Mrs. Eva Helmer had made on several occasions was not for the purpose of establishing a common-law marriage in such state and therefore Mrs. Eva Helmer is not the statutory widow of deceased entitled to death benefits.” The present record does not factually establish the necessary requirements to consummate a common-law marriage in the State of Pennsylvania. (See Donaldson v. Oesterling & Sons, 28 Pa. D. & C. 2d 583, affd. 199 Pa. Super. Ct. 637.) Decision affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Staley, Jr., Cooke, Sweeney and Simons, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.D.2d 641, 327 N.Y.S.2d 315, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2670, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-helmer-v-savin-bros-nyappdiv-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack