Claim of Zaro v. Zaro Tourist & Steamship Ticket Agency, Inc.
222 A.D. 700
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 15, 1927·Published
Opinion
The carrier having been given an opportunity on the argument to procure if possible representation by the employer on this- appeal and having been unable to do so the appeal must be dismissed. (See Matter of Hammele v. McMahon, 220 App. Div. 60.) Cochrane, P. J., Van Kirk, Hinman, McCann and Whitmyer, JJ., concur. Appeal dismissed, with ten dollars costs against the insurance carrier to the State Industrial Board.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Claim of Zaro v. Zaro Tourist & Steamship Ticket Agency, Inc., 222 A.D. 700 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1927).
222 A.D. 700 (Claim of Zaro v. Zaro Tourist & Steamship Ticket Agency, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Claim of Hammele v. McMahon
220 A.D. 60 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1927)