Claim of Marinaccio v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Marinaccio v. City of New York

259 A.D. 947, 19 N.Y.S.2d 958, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7390

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

DecidedMay 15, 1940

StatusPublished

This text of 259 A.D. 947 (Claim of Marinaccio v. City of New York) 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 Marinaccio v. City of New York, 259 A.D. 947, 19 N.Y.S.2d 958, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7390 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

This is an appeal from a decision of the State Industrial Board denying appellant’s application to classify this case as one coming under section 25-a of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. The claimant, in the employ of the city of New York, suffered an accident on February 6, 1932. Awards were made to him in April and September, 1932, and with the latter award the case was closed. On May 31, 1933, claimant wrote to the Department of Labor as follows: “ Referring to my case 2.22.33 about my eyes, same is not all cured. I would like to apply for compensation. Kindly advise me what to do.” The letter was received June 2, 1933. The application was acknowledged on June 21, 1933, with instructions as to what claimant should do. Claimant subsequently filed a medical report showing the extent of his injuries. Claimant’s application was filed on May 31, 1933, which was within seven years from the date of his accident. The award is not payable out of the Special Fund established pursuant to the provisions of section 25-a of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. (Matter of Ludgen v. Jamestown Asphalt Paving Materials Corp., 257 App. Div. 881.) Decision of the [State] Industrial Board unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Hill, P. J., Crapser, Heffernan, Schenck and Foster, JJ.

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

This is an appeal from a decision of the State Industrial Board denying appellant’s application to classify this case as one coming under section 25-a of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. The claimant, in the employ of the city of New York, suffered an accident on February 6, 1932. Awards were made to him in April and September, 1932, and with the latter award the case was closed. On May 31, 1933, claimant wrote to the Department of Labor as follows: “ Referring to my case 2.22.33 about my eyes, same is not all cured. I would like to apply for compensation. Kindly advise me what to do.” The letter was received June 2, 1933. The application was acknowledged on June 21, 1933, with instructions as to what claimant should do. Claimant subsequently filed a medical report showing the extent of his injuries. Claimant’s application was filed on May 31, 1933, which was within seven years from the date of his accident. The award is not payable out of the Special Fund established pursuant to the provisions of section 25-a of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. (Matter of Ludgen v. Jamestown Asphalt Paving Materials Corp., 257 App. Div. 881.) Decision of the [State] Industrial Board unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Hill, P. J., Crapser, Heffernan, Schenck and Foster, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

259 A.D. 947, 19 N.Y.S.2d 958, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7390, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-marinaccio-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack