Claim of Orr v. Freudenheim
This text of 226 A.D. 837 (Claim of Orr v. Freudenheim) 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
— Award reversed and claim dismissed, with costs against the State Industrial Board, on the ground that claimant was not in the service of an employer engaged in one of the employments covered by the Workmen’s Compensation Law (Workmen’s Compensation Law, § 2, subds. 3 and 4; Id. § 3; Goldberger v. Goldberger, 200 App. Div. 190); and on the further ground that claimant was an independent contractor, (Adel v. Rubin, 210 App. Div. 499; Matter of Beach v. Velzy, 238 N. Y. 100; Ball v. Estate of Bertelle, 201 App. Div. 768.) Van Bark, P. J., Hinman, Whitmyer and Hill, JJ., concur; Hasbrouek, J., concurs on the first ground stated.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
226 A.D. 837, 234 N.Y.S. 856, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-orr-v-freudenheim-nyappdiv-1929.