Claim of Neu v. Van Rees Bookbinding Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Neu v. Van Rees Bookbinding Corp.

252 A.D. 801, 299 N.Y.S. 143, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6331

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

DecidedOctober 6, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 252 A.D. 801 (Claim of Neu v. Van Rees Bookbinding Corp.) 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 Neu v. Van Rees Bookbinding Corp., 252 A.D. 801, 299 N.Y.S. 143, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6331 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion to compel State Industrial Board to accept service of appellants’ notice of appeal denied. Hill, P. J., Rhodes, and Crapser, JJ., concur; MeNamee and Bliss, JJ., dissent, and vote to require the State Industrial Board to accept service of the notice of appeal, first, on the ground that the notice of appeal was not returned for many days after service, whereas the common rule and practice has been and is that if papers are to be returned they must be returned within twenty-four hours; and, second, that the denial of the first application must be considered indefinite in view of the fact that the State Industrial Board entertained a second application, and passed upon it by a denial thereof; and having entertained a second application, and having decided it, it is evident that the State Industrial Board did not regard the first application as the final determination. If the first decision was regarded as final, the application should not have been entertained, but dismissed and not denied.

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

Motion to compel State Industrial Board to accept service of appellants’ notice of appeal denied. Hill, P. J., Rhodes, and Crapser, JJ., concur; MeNamee and Bliss, JJ., dissent, and vote to require the State Industrial Board to accept service of the notice of appeal, first, on the ground that the notice of appeal was not returned for many days after service, whereas the common rule and practice has been and is that if papers are to be returned they must be returned within twenty-four hours; and, second, that the denial of the first application must be considered indefinite in view of the fact that the State Industrial Board entertained a second application, and passed upon it by a denial thereof; and having entertained a second application, and having decided it, it is evident that the State Industrial Board did not regard the first application as the final determination. If the first decision was regarded as final, the application should not have been entertained, but dismissed and not denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

252 A.D. 801, 299 N.Y.S. 143, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6331, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-neu-v-van-rees-bookbinding-corp-nyappdiv-1937.