Claim of Levy v. Hellman & Orenstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Levy v. Hellman & Orenstein

244 A.D. 853

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

DecidedMay 15, 1935

StatusPublished

This text of 244 A.D. 853 (Claim of Levy v. Hellman & Orenstein) 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 Levy v. Hellman & Orenstein, 244 A.D. 853 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

Award against two employers and their carriers. On November 23, 1925, and while working for the first employer, the claimant was injured. The case was closed by a lump sum payment on October 1, 1926. On October 29, 1930, while working for the second employer, he had a second accident; it was determined that the injuries following the second accident were occasioned by both accidents, and the award accordingly made. The first employer and carrier contend that the portion of the award levied against them should be paid from the special fund under section 25a of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. The Board decided that application for reopening had been received before the effective date of the amendment to section 25-a of the Workmen’s Compensation Law.

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

Award against two employers and their carriers. On November 23, 1925, and while working for the first employer, the claimant was injured. The case was closed by a lump sum payment on October 1, 1926. On October 29, 1930, while working for the second employer, he had a second accident; it was determined that the injuries following the second accident were occasioned by both accidents, and the award accordingly made. The first employer and carrier contend that the portion of the award levied against them should be paid from the special fund under section 25a of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. The Board decided that application for reopening had been received before the effective date of the amendment to section 25-a of the Workmen’s Compensation Law.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

244 A.D. 853, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-levy-v-hellman-orenstein-nyappdiv-1935.