Claim of Werenjchik v. Ulen Contracting Corp.

New York Court of Appeals

Claim of Werenjchik v. Ulen Contracting Corp.

175 N.E. 112, 255 N.Y. 411, 1931 N.Y. LEXIS 695

DecidedFebruary 10, 1931

StatusPublished

This text of 175 N.E. 112 (Claim of Werenjchik v. Ulen Contracting Corp.) 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 Werenjchik v. Ulen Contracting Corp., 175 N.E. 112, 255 N.Y. 411, 1931 N.Y. LEXIS 695 (N.Y. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The case on appeal, presented to this court by the appellant as comprising a true record of the proof and proceedings before the Industrial Board, contains a document wherein are given the precise ages of the children who are claimants. How the document became a part of the record does not appear. Whether it was offered in evidence by the claimants or the appéllant; whether it was received under objection or by consent; of these things there is no disclosure in the record. In presenting the record to this couit, the appellant has necessarily presented the document. On its face, it exhibits the proof necessary to sustain the award. We think that we were justified in accepting the document at its face value, and that explanations now made as to its origin, never having appeared in the record, have come too late.

The motion should be denied.

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

Per Curiam.

The case on appeal, presented to this court by the appellant as comprising a true record of the proof and proceedings before the Industrial Board, contains a document wherein are given the precise ages of the children who are claimants. How the document became a part of the record does not appear. Whether it was offered in evidence by the claimants or the appéllant; whether it was received under objection or by consent; of these things there is no disclosure in the record. In presenting the record to this couit, the appellant has necessarily presented the document. On its face, it exhibits the proof necessary to sustain the award. We think that we were justified in accepting the document at its face value, and that explanations now made as to its origin, never having appeared in the record, have come too late.

The motion should be denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

175 N.E. 112, 255 N.Y. 411, 1931 N.Y. LEXIS 695, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-werenjchik-v-ulen-contracting-corp-ny-1931.