Claim of Rak v. New York Car Wheel Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Rak v. New York Car Wheel Co.

272 A.D.2d 855

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

DecidedMay 14, 1947

StatusPublished

This text of 272 A.D.2d 855 (Claim of Rak v. New York Car Wheel 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 Rak v. New York Car Wheel Co., 272 A.D.2d 855 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1947).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an award of death benefits made under the Workmen's Compensation Law to the widow of a deceased employee. Decedent died as a result of heart failure, and there is evidence to sustain a finding that the fatal attack was brought on and induced by shock resulting from an industrial accident. Decedent was not so disabled prior to the accident that he was unable to perform his usual duties, and not disabled within the meaning of subdivision 8-a of section 15 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law [see now § 15, subd. 8], Hence the Special Fund was not liable for any part of the award. Appellant’s contentions that it was denied due process are without merit. Award affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. All concur.

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

Appeal from an award of death benefits made under the Workmen's Compensation Law to the widow of a deceased employee. Decedent died as a result of heart failure, and there is evidence to sustain a finding that the fatal attack was brought on and induced by shock resulting from an industrial accident. Decedent was not so disabled prior to the accident that he was unable to perform his usual duties, and not disabled within the meaning of subdivision 8-a of section 15 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law [see now § 15, subd. 8], Hence the Special Fund was not liable for any part of the award. Appellant’s contentions that it was denied due process are without merit. Award affirmed, with costs to the Workmen’s Compensation Board. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 A.D.2d 855, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-rak-v-new-york-car-wheel-co-nyappdiv-1947.