Peterson v. Erie Railroad

228 A.D. 859

This text of 228 A.D. 859 (Peterson v. Erie Railroad) 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
Peterson v. Erie Railroad, 228 A.D. 859 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1930).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Gustav Peterson, an employee of the Erie railroad, self-insured, fell from a scaffold to the floor of his employer’s plant on January 11, 1928, and was injured. The employer did not refuse or neglect to provide such medical treatment as the nature of the injury required nor make an unreasonable selection of a physician to give treatments. Employer offered such treatment and Peterson refused same and employed Dr. Burch and paid him $164. He did not furnish, as required by section 13, Workmen’s Compensation Law, a report of the injury and treatment within twenty days following the first treatment. Claimant has laid no basis for the claim allowed by the Industrial Board. (Sandberg v. Seymour Dress Company, Inc., 215 App. Div. 728; affd., 242 N. T. 497; Keigher v. General

[860]*860Electric Co., 173 App. Div. 207; Brastowicz v. Doehler Die Casting Co., 187 id. 961.) Hinman, Acting P. J., Davis, Whitmyer, PULL and Hasbrouek, JJ., concur. Award reversed and claim dismissed, with costs against ■ the State Industrial Board.

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

Related

Keigher v. General Electric Co.
173 A.D. 207 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1916)
Sandberg v. Seymour Dress Co.
215 A.D. 728 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1925)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
228 A.D. 859, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/peterson-v-erie-railroad-nyappdiv-1930.