Claim of Holst v. New York Stock Exchange

252 A.D. 233, 299 N.Y.S. 255, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5615
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedSeptember 29, 1937
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 252 A.D. 233 (Claim of Holst v. New York Stock Exchange) 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 Holst v. New York Stock Exchange, 252 A.D. 233, 299 N.Y.S. 255, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5615 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Opinion

Hill, P. J.

Claimant, a page employed by the New York Stock Exchange, was injured while playing upon a soccer team maintained by his employer. The opposing team was recruited from the employees of a corporation which conducts a chain of restaurants. [234]*234The game was played after the hour when the exchange was closed for trading. The officials and employees of the exchange assist in organizing baseball, soccer, hockey and other athletic teams and the employees are encouraged to engage in these competitive athletic sports. Games with other teams, some in cities outside of New York, are arranged by the employer, who has the receipts from the games and guarantees and pays the deficit which arises from the venture. Employees are given time off for games and practice. At times consideration is given to athletic prowess when the younger employees are hired. We are not required to decide whether the employer was actuated by a belief that the venture was wise because of its advertising features or because of the improved health and morale of the employees. The maintenance of the teams was a matter of business, not of charity or benevolence. The officials of a corporation may not extend largess from stockholders’ money. The claimant was injured while engaged in his employment. (Gross v. Davey Tree Expert Co., 248 App. Div. 838; affd., 272 N. Y. 657.)

The award should be affirmed.

Rhodes, McNamee, Crapser and Heffernan, JJ., concur.

Award affirmed, with costs to the State Industrial Board.

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

Related

Complitano v. Steel & Alloy Tank Co.
164 A.2d 792 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1960)
Jewel Tea Co. v. Industrial Commission
128 N.E.2d 699 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1955)
Elster v. American Airlines, Inc.
100 A.2d 219 (Court of Chancery of Delaware, 1953)
Elster v. American Airlines
100 A.2d 219 (Court of Chancery of Delaware, 1953)
University of Denver v. Nemeth
257 P.2d 423 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1953)
Claim of Tedesco v. General Electric Co.
276 A.D.2d 422 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1950)
Matter of Wilson v. General Motors Corp.
84 N.E.2d 781 (New York Court of Appeals, 1949)
Ott v. Industrial Commission
82 N.E.2d 137 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1948)
Auerbach Co. v. Industrial Commission
195 P.2d 245 (Utah Supreme Court, 1948)
Geary v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co.
188 P.2d 185 (Montana Supreme Court, 1947)
Dearing v. Union Free School District No. 1
272 A.D.2d 167 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1947)
Linderman v. Cownie Furs
13 N.W.2d 677 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1944)
Le Bar v. Ewald Bros. Dairy
13 N.W.2d 729 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1944)
Pate v. Plymouth Mfg. Co.
17 S.E.2d 146 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1941)
Claim of Fagan v. Albany Evening Union Co.
261 A.D. 861 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1941)
Claim of Piusinski v. Transit Valley Country Club
259 A.D. 765 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
252 A.D. 233, 299 N.Y.S. 255, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5615, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-holst-v-new-york-stock-exchange-nyappdiv-1937.