Home/New York Court of Appeals/In Re the Claim of Cohen

In Re the Claim of Cohen

490 N.E.2d 552, 67 N.Y.2d 683, 499 N.Y.S.2d 685, 1986 N.Y. LEXIS 17085
New York Court of Appeals·Decided February 6, 1986·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum of the Appellate Division (112 AD2d 687). We add only that unlike Matter of 12 Cornelia St. (Ross) (56 NY2d 895), the evidence here indicates the employer was able to exercise control over the activities of its salespersons beyond the requirements of applicable governmental regulation.

Concur: Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone and Hancock, Jr.

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

In Re the Claim of Cohen, 490 N.E.2d 552, 67 N.Y.2d 683, 499 N.Y.S.2d 685, 1986 N.Y. LEXIS 17085 (N.Y. 1986).

490 N.E.2d 552 (In Re the Claim of Cohen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re the Claim of Chorekchan
128 A.D.3d 1311 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
In re Luff
194 A.D.2d 1003 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
In re Cobb
193 A.D.2d 848 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
In re the Claim of Barnhart
189 A.D.2d 1050 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
In re the Claim of Froehlich
184 A.D.2d 946 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
In re the Claim of Neil
180 A.D.2d 990 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
In re Wapnick
167 A.D.2d 622 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
In re the Claim of Bourk
165 A.D.2d 969 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
In re the Claim of Sortina
161 A.D.2d 922 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)