Claim of Whitmyre v. International Business MacHines Corp.

8 N.E.2d 278, 274 N.Y. 61, 1937 N.Y. LEXIS 816
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedApril 27, 1937
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 8 N.E.2d 278 (Claim of Whitmyre v. International Business MacHines 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 Whitmyre v. International Business MacHines Corp., 8 N.E.2d 278, 274 N.Y. 61, 1937 N.Y. LEXIS 816 (N.Y. 1937).

Opinion

*63 Per Curiam.

Because notice of disablement way not given pursuant to section 45 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 67), this court in Matter of Whitmyre v. International B. M. Corp. (267 N. Y. 28) reversed the award and dismissed the claim. Thereafter the State Industrial Board reconsidered the case, making a new finding that written notice of disablement was not given to the employer within the time prescribed by sections 18 and 45 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law, but such notice could not have been given for the reason that the cause of disablement was not known until after the death and autopsy. The finding further stated that the employer was not prejudiced- by the failure to give such written notice. On these new findings, another award was made which has been affirmed by the Appellate Division.

Continuing jurisdiction over workmen’s compensation cases is given to the State Industrial Board by sections 22, 23 and 123 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law. The power and jurisdiction of the Board to reopen a claim after a reversal and dismissal; to take new evidence and make new findings, have been approved by this court in Matter of McMahon v. Gretzula (267 N. Y. 573, affg. 242 App. Div. 742); Matter of DiDonato v. Rosenberg (256 N. Y. 412).

There being evidence to sustain the new findings of the Board, we affirm the order of the Appellate Division and the award of the Industrial Board.

The order should be affirmed, with costs.

Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Htjbbs, Lotjghran, Finch and Rippey, JJ., concur.

Order affirmed.

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

Related

Matter of Stickle v. Westcott Garage
45 N.E.2d 904 (New York Court of Appeals, 1942)
Claim of Daus v. Gunderman & Sons, Inc.
28 N.E.2d 914 (New York Court of Appeals, 1940)
Claim of Whitmyre v. International Business MacHines Corp.
11 N.E.2d 734 (New York Court of Appeals, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 N.E.2d 278, 274 N.Y. 61, 1937 N.Y. LEXIS 816, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-whitmyre-v-international-business-machines-corp-ny-1937.