In Re Schwalenstocker

New York Court of Appeals

In Re Schwalenstocker

59 N.E.2d 448, 293 N.Y. 861, 1944 N.Y. LEXIS 2283

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 22, 1944

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 59 N.E.2d 448 (In Re Schwalenstocker) 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

In Re Schwalenstocker, 59 N.E.2d 448, 293 N.Y. 861, 1944 N.Y. LEXIS 2283 (N.Y. 1944).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of the Appellate Division affirming the award of compensation reversed and claim dismissed, without costs, upon the ground that there was no evidence that the cold contracted by claimant was an accidental injury within the meaning of *Page 863 Workmen's Compensation Law, section 2, subdivision 7, that is to say, within the common understanding of "accidental injuries" in common speech; nor was there any evidence of causal connection between the claimant's exposure to low temperature in the course of his employment on April 5, 1940, and his disability resulting from heart attacks on April 20th of the same year and on April 14th of the following year. The testimony given by a physician at the last hearing in answer to a hypothetical question was predicated upon the assumption of facts unsupported by evidence or by personal examination of the claimant. No opinion.

Concur: LEHMAN, Ch. J., LOUGHRAN, RIPPEY, LEWIS, CONWAY, DESMOND and THACHER, JJ.

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

Order of the Appellate Division affirming the award of compensation reversed and claim dismissed, without costs, upon the ground that there was no evidence that the cold contracted by claimant was an accidental injury within the meaning of *Page 863 Workmen's Compensation Law, section 2, subdivision 7, that is to say, within the common understanding of "accidental injuries" in common speech; nor was there any evidence of causal connection between the claimant's exposure to low temperature in the course of his employment on April 5, 1940, and his disability resulting from heart attacks on April 20th of the same year and on April 14th of the following year. The testimony given by a physician at the last hearing in answer to a hypothetical question was predicated upon the assumption of facts unsupported by evidence or by personal examination of the claimant. No opinion.

Concur: LEHMAN, Ch. J., LOUGHRAN, RIPPEY, LEWIS, CONWAY, DESMOND and THACHER, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 N.E.2d 448, 293 N.Y. 861, 1944 N.Y. LEXIS 2283, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-schwalenstocker-ny-1944.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack