Claim of Whittaker v. A. Ratner & Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Claim of Whittaker v. A. Ratner & Co.

264 A.D. 969, 37 N.Y.S.2d 104, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5576

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

DecidedSeptember 23, 1942

StatusPublished

This text of 264 A.D. 969 (Claim of Whittaker v. A. Ratner & 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 Whittaker v. A. Ratner & Co., 264 A.D. 969, 37 N.Y.S.2d 104, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5576 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

The employer and its insurance carrier had appealed from an award of death benefits in favor of the widow of the deceased employee. The State Industrial Board found that on March 29,1937, while engaged in the regular course of his employment, the deceased employee suffered an unusual strain in lifting pails of hot tar which caused him to suffer an acute cardiac condition which resulted in his death. The Board also a found that on the day of the accident decedent was performing work of a more strenuous nature than for many years prior thereto and that he had never performed work of that nature before. The evidence sustains the finding of the State Industrial Board. Award unanimously affirmed, with costs to the State Industrial Board. Present — Hill, P. J., Crapser, Hefiernan, Schenek and Foster, JJ.

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

The employer and its insurance carrier had appealed from an award of death benefits in favor of the widow of the deceased employee. The State Industrial Board found that on March 29,1937, while engaged in the regular course of his employment, the deceased employee suffered an unusual strain in lifting pails of hot tar which caused him to suffer an acute cardiac condition which resulted in his death. The Board also a found that on the day of the accident decedent was performing work of a more strenuous nature than for many years prior thereto and that he had never performed work of that nature before. The evidence sustains the finding of the State Industrial Board. Award unanimously affirmed, with costs to the State Industrial Board. Present — Hill, P. J., Crapser, Hefiernan, Schenek and Foster, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

264 A.D. 969, 37 N.Y.S.2d 104, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5576, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-whittaker-v-a-ratner-co-nyappdiv-1942.