Claim of O'Esau v. E. W. Bliss Co.
This text of 186 A.D. 556 (Claim of O'Esau v. E. W. Bliss 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.
Opinion
The employee was injured on the 28th day of March, 1916, and died on account of such injuries March 21,1918. The employee failed to file a notice of injury, as required by sec- ' tion 18, but the claim was filed as required by section 28 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law.
Kelliher v. N. Y. C. & H. R. R. R. Co. (212 N. Y. 207), relied upon by the appellants, does not sustain their contention. There it was held that the action was.a purely statutory one, and that, by the terms of the statute, the right to recover against a person for wrongfully or negligently causing a death did not survive after the injured person had permitted the limitation imposed by the statute to expire. The statute we are construing has no such provision, but upon the contrary carries a different intent. The award should be affirmed.
Award unanimously affirmed.
See Consol. Laws, chap. 67 (Laws of 1914, chap. 41), §§ 18, 28. Since amd. by Laws of 1918, chap. 634.— [Rep.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
186 A.D. 556, 174 N.Y.S. 739, 1919 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5889, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-oesau-v-e-w-bliss-co-nyappdiv-1919.