Claim of Mendelson v. Modern Vending Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Mendelson v. Modern Vending Co.

264 A.D. 966, 37 N.Y.S.2d 103, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5568

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

DecidedSeptember 23, 1942

StatusPublished

This text of 264 A.D. 966 (Claim of Mendelson v. Modern Vending 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 Mendelson v. Modern Vending Co., 264 A.D. 966, 37 N.Y.S.2d 103, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5568 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an award of [967]*967compensation. The issue involved is whether claimant’s accident arose out of and in the course of his employment. He was employed as a salesman in the sale of automatic phonographs, and had no regular hours of employment. On the day of the accident, which was a Sunday, he visited a restaurant in the afternoon. Although he had lunch there he testified that the main purpose of his visit was to induce the proprietor to purchase a phonograph. There is other evidence to indicate that such was his mission. On his way home he was struck by an automobile and injured. It has been found that the accident arose out of and in the course of his employment. Award unanimously affirmed, with costs to the State Industrial Board. Present— Hill, P. J., Crapser, Heffernan, Sehenek and Foster, JJ.

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

Appeal from an award of [967]*967compensation. The issue involved is whether claimant’s accident arose out of and in the course of his employment. He was employed as a salesman in the sale of automatic phonographs, and had no regular hours of employment. On the day of the accident, which was a Sunday, he visited a restaurant in the afternoon. Although he had lunch there he testified that the main purpose of his visit was to induce the proprietor to purchase a phonograph. There is other evidence to indicate that such was his mission. On his way home he was struck by an automobile and injured. It has been found that the accident arose out of and in the course of his employment. Award unanimously affirmed, with costs to the State Industrial Board. Present— Hill, P. J., Crapser, Heffernan, Sehenek and Foster, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

264 A.D. 966, 37 N.Y.S.2d 103, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5568, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-mendelson-v-modern-vending-co-nyappdiv-1942.