Claim of Hoffman v. Chatham Electric Light, Heat & Power Co.

164 N.E. 341, 249 N.Y. 433, 1928 N.Y. LEXIS 826
New York Court of Appeals·Decided December 4, 1928·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Under our ruling in Matter of Marhoffer v. Marhoffer (220 N. Y. 543) awards for injuries may not properly be consecutive.

The question of the application of subdivision 3-u of section 15 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 67) is not before us on these appeals.

The orders should be affirmed with costs against the State Industrial Board and the questions certified answered in the negative.

Cardozo, Ch. J., Pound, Crane, Andrews, Lehman, Kellogg and O’Brien, JJ., concur.

Orders affirmed, etc.

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

Claim of Hoffman v. Chatham Electric Light, Heat & Power Co., 164 N.E. 341, 249 N.Y. 433, 1928 N.Y. LEXIS 826 (N.Y. 1928).

164 N.E. 341 (Claim of Hoffman v. Chatham Electric Light, Heat & Power Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mizrahi's Case
71 N.E.2d 383 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1947)
Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. v. Monahan
54 F.2d 349 (First Circuit, 1931)
Nelson v. Service Oil Co.
238 N.W. 525 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1931)
Claim of Flicker v. Mac Sign Co.
227 A.D. 673 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1929)
Claim of Carolan v. R. Hoe & Co.
225 A.D. 393 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1929)
laim of Ezeckel v. Saperstein
225 A.D. 836 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1929)