Claim of Roettinger v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.
196 N.E.2d 268, 13 N.Y.2d 1102
This text of 196 N.E.2d 268 (Claim of Roettinger v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Claim of Roettinger v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., 196 N.E.2d 268, 13 N.Y.2d 1102 (N.Y. 1963).
Opinion
Order affirmed, with costs to respondent Workmen’s Compensation Board; no opinion.
[1104]*1104Concur: Chief Judge Desmond and Judges Dye, Fuld, Burke, Foster and Scileppi. Judge Van Voorhis dissents and votes to reverse and to dismiss the claim upon the ground that there is no substantial evidence that the award is based on any occupational disease.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Zoss v. United Building Centers, Inc.
1997 SD 93 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1997)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
196 N.E.2d 268, 13 N.Y.2d 1102, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-roettinger-v-great-atlantic-pacific-tea-co-ny-1963.