Claim of Jorgensen v. Beach

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Jorgensen v. Beach

277 A.D.2d 960

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

DecidedSeptember 21, 1950

StatusPublished

This text of 277 A.D.2d 960 (Claim of Jorgensen v. Beach) 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 Jorgensen v. Beach, 277 A.D.2d 960 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by a noninsured employer from a decision and an award of the Workmen’s Compensation Board. This employer, although a farmer, was engaged in a lumbering operation on land which he neither owned nor rented, quite distinct and apart from his usual farm operations. It was in this operation that claimant, who was not a regular farm hand, was engaged when injured. The employer was, therefore, subject to the Workmen’s Compensation Law. The evidence is sufficient to sustain the board’s findings that an employer-employee relationship existed and that claimant was acting within the scope of his authority when he was injured. Decision and award unanimously affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Present — Foster, P. J., Brewster, Deyo, Bergan and Coon, JJ.

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

Appeal by a noninsured employer from a decision and an award of the Workmen’s Compensation Board. This employer, although a farmer, was engaged in a lumbering operation on land which he neither owned nor rented, quite distinct and apart from his usual farm operations. It was in this operation that claimant, who was not a regular farm hand, was engaged when injured. The employer was, therefore, subject to the Workmen’s Compensation Law. The evidence is sufficient to sustain the board’s findings that an employer-employee relationship existed and that claimant was acting within the scope of his authority when he was injured. Decision and award unanimously affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Present — Foster, P. J., Brewster, Deyo, Bergan and Coon, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

277 A.D.2d 960, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-jorgensen-v-beach-nyappdiv-1950.