Claim of Kristianson v. Lehman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Kristianson v. Lehman

261 A.D. 1023, 25 N.Y.S.2d 833, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8584

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

DecidedMarch 12, 1941

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 261 A.D. 1023 (Claim of Kristianson v. Lehman) 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 Kristianson v. Lehman, 261 A.D. 1023, 25 N.Y.S.2d 833, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8584 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Claimant was a cook at the residence of employer. Sunday she was requested to obtain medicines from a drug store while on her way to work Monday morning. She slipped and fell upon the sidewalk while proceeding to the drug store from her home. Award affirmed, wi1h costs to the State Industrial Board. Hill, P. J., Bliss, Heffernan and Foster, JJ., concur; Crapser, J., dissents and votes to reverse the award and dismiss the claim on the grounds: first, that claimant was paid her wages by her employer; second, that the claimant at the time of the fall on Fifty-eighth street at Third avenue was following the usual route up to that point that she used every morning and had not reached the point where she deviated to go upon the errand at the drug store.

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

Claimant was a cook at the residence of employer. Sunday she was requested to obtain medicines from a drug store while on her way to work Monday morning. She slipped and fell upon the sidewalk while proceeding to the drug store from her home. Award affirmed, wi1h costs to the State Industrial Board. Hill, P. J., Bliss, Heffernan and Foster, JJ., concur; Crapser, J., dissents and votes to reverse the award and dismiss the claim on the grounds: first, that claimant was paid her wages by her employer; second, that the claimant at the time of the fall on Fifty-eighth street at Third avenue was following the usual route up to that point that she used every morning and had not reached the point where she deviated to go upon the errand at the drug store.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D. 1023, 25 N.Y.S.2d 833, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8584, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-kristianson-v-lehman-nyappdiv-1941.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack