Claim of Higgins v. August Krazeise, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Higgins v. August Krazeise, Inc.

271 A.D.2d 907

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

DecidedDecember 30, 1946

StatusPublished

This text of 271 A.D.2d 907 (Claim of Higgins v. August Krazeise, 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 Higgins v. August Krazeise, Inc., 271 A.D.2d 907 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

Claimant appeals from a decision of the former Industrial Board, which in effect affirmed a decision of a referee disallowing the claim on the ground that no causal relation was established between the accident and claimant’s kidney condition, for which he was operated on in 1940. The decision should be reversed, and the claim remitted to the Workmen’s Compensation Board for further consideration on the ground that claimant’s rights were substantially prejudiced by the failure, of the board to give him an opportunity to cross-examine Dr. Ritter, one of the most important medical witnesses called against him. Decision reversed, with $50 costs to claimant and against the carrier, and claim remitted to the Workmen’s Compensation Board for further consideration. All concur.

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

Claimant appeals from a decision of the former Industrial Board, which in effect affirmed a decision of a referee disallowing the claim on the ground that no causal relation was established between the accident and claimant’s kidney condition, for which he was operated on in 1940. The decision should be reversed, and the claim remitted to the Workmen’s Compensation Board for further consideration on the ground that claimant’s rights were substantially prejudiced by the failure, of the board to give him an opportunity to cross-examine Dr. Ritter, one of the most important medical witnesses called against him. Decision reversed, with $50 costs to claimant and against the carrier, and claim remitted to the Workmen’s Compensation Board for further consideration. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 A.D.2d 907, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-higgins-v-august-krazeise-inc-nyappdiv-1946.