Kempston v. Thompson-Starrett Co.

211 A.D. 820
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 15, 1924·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

A motion for a rehearing on the ground of newly-discovered evidence should be made, not to this court, but to the State Industrial Board. Whatever informal understanding there may have been with the Board in this case does not excuse such a motion. Furthermore, the moving papers disolose that the claimant was employed by the Ohio company to fire its boiler and by the appellant as its night watchman, duties not inconsistent with each other, but do not disclose that the accident occurred while he was acting in the former capacity. On the merits, therefore, the appellant is not entitled to a rehearing. Award unanimously affirmed, with costs in favor of the State Industrial Board. Motion to remit case .to State Industrial Board denied, with ten dollars costs in favor of said Board.

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

Kempston v. Thompson-Starrett Co., 211 A.D. 820 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1924).

211 A.D. 820 (Kempston v. Thompson-Starrett Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Town of Albion v. Industrial Commission
231 N.W. 249 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1930)