Claim of McCarty v. Dahlstrom Metallic Door Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of McCarty v. Dahlstrom Metallic Door Co.

12 A.D.2d 673, 207 N.Y.S.2d 713, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6735

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

DecidedDecember 2, 1960

StatusPublished

This text of 12 A.D.2d 673 (Claim of McCarty v. Dahlstrom Metallic Door Co.) 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 McCarty v. Dahlstrom Metallic Door Co., 12 A.D.2d 673, 207 N.Y.S.2d 713, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6735 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision and award of the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Claimant was injured playing baseball in a team sponsored by his employer, the Dahlstrom Metallic Door Co. The team was a member of the Industrial League of Jamestown. An award has been made and the issue is whether the case falls within Matter of Wilson v. General Motors Corp. (298 N. Y. 468) and must be reversed; or within Matter of Tedesco v. General Elec. Co. (305 N. Y. 544) and be affirmed. We are of opinion the substantial criteria of employer-sponsored athletic activity laid down in the latter decision is in this record. The team was composed entirely of employees of the employer; the expenses of the team, consisting of the cost of uniforms, equipment and entry fee, were paid by the employer, which required that all equipment be returned to it. The name of the employer was lettered on each uniform, and jackets had similar lettering. The name of the employer was used by the team, which appeared in press announcements and in other announcements; and in a year (1958) in which there had been a strike in the plant, no team was organized. A sufficient control by the employer; and of benefit to the employer from the team, are thus demonstrated. Decision and award unanimously affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board.

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

Appeal from a decision and award of the Workmen’s Compensation Board. Claimant was injured playing baseball in a team sponsored by his employer, the Dahlstrom Metallic Door Co. The team was a member of the Industrial League of Jamestown. An award has been made and the issue is whether the case falls within Matter of Wilson v. General Motors Corp. (298 N. Y. 468) and must be reversed; or within Matter of Tedesco v. General Elec. Co. (305 N. Y. 544) and be affirmed. We are of opinion the substantial criteria of employer-sponsored athletic activity laid down in the latter decision is in this record. The team was composed entirely of employees of the employer; the expenses of the team, consisting of the cost of uniforms, equipment and entry fee, were paid by the employer, which required that all equipment be returned to it. The name of the employer was lettered on each uniform, and jackets had similar lettering. The name of the employer was used by the team, which appeared in press announcements and in other announcements; and in a year (1958) in which there had been a strike in the plant, no team was organized. A sufficient control by the employer; and of benefit to the employer from the team, are thus demonstrated. Decision and award unanimously affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 A.D.2d 673, 207 N.Y.S.2d 713, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6735, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-mccarty-v-dahlstrom-metallic-door-co-nyappdiv-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack