Siegal v. Strauss

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Siegal v. Strauss

138 Misc. 380, 245 N.Y.S. 688, 1930 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1638

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 19, 1930

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 138 Misc. 380 (Siegal v. Strauss) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Siegal v. Strauss, 138 Misc. 380, 245 N.Y.S. 688, 1930 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1638 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The provisions of section 13 of the Workmen’s Compensation Law (as amd. by Laws of 1927, chap. 553) have no application to an action at law by a physician to recover from the employer the agreed price for services rendered to an employee at the employer’s request. (See Frant v. Cobban & Son, Inc., 133 Misc. 433; affd., 226 App. Div. 796.)

There was no proof to establish an agreement by plaintiff to conform to the Workmen’s Compensation Law, nor was there any plea of election of remedies. It was error, therefore, to receive evidence concerning the requirements of the Workmen’s Compensation Law and of plaintiff’s failure to comply therewith and to charge the jury with respect thereto.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to appellant to abide the event.

All concur; present, Lydon, Levy and Callahan, JJ.

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